nl10k2008.htm
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
|
Washington,
D.C. 20549
|
|
X
FORM
10-K
|
ANNUAL
REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES
EXCHANGE
ACT
OF 1934 - For the fiscal year ended December
31, 2008
|
|
Commission
file number 1-640
|
|
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC.
|
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
New
Jersey
|
13-5267260
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
(IRS
Employer
Identification
No.)
|
|
5430 LBJ Freeway, Suite 1700, Dallas,
Texas
|
75240-2697
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
(Zip
Code)
|
|
Registrant's
telephone number, including area
code: (972) 233-1700
|
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
Title of each class
|
Name
of each exchange on
which
registered
|
Common
stock
|
New
York Stock Exchange
|
Securities
registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
None.
Indicate
by check mark:
If
the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the
Securities Act. Yes No
X
If
the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section
15(d) of the Act. Yes No
X
Whether
the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months and
(2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90
days. Yes X No
If
disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not
contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant's
knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by
reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. Yes
No
X
Whether
the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a
non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company (as defined in Rule 12b-2
of the Act). Large accelerated filer
Accelerated filer X Non-accelerated
filer
Smaller reporting company
Whether
the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes
No
X
The
aggregate market value of the 6.8 million shares of voting stock held by
nonaffiliates of NL Industries, Inc. as of June 30, 2008 (the last business day
of the Registrant's most recently-completed second fiscal quarter) approximated
$65 million.
As
of February 27, 2009, 48,602,584 shares of the Registrant's common stock were
outstanding.
Documents incorporated by
reference
The
information required by Part III is incorporated by reference from the
Registrant's definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Commission pursuant
to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year
covered by this report.
PART
I
The
Company
NL
Industries, Inc. was organized as a New Jersey corporation in
1891. Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange, or the
NYSE, under the symbol NL. References to “NL Industries,” “NL,” the
“Company,” the “Registrant,” “we,” “our,” “us” and similar terms mean NL
Industries, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliate, unless the context
otherwise requires.
Our
principal executive offices are located at Three Lincoln Center, 5430 LBJ
Freeway, Suite 1700, Dallas, TX 75240. Our telephone number is (972)
233-1700. We maintain a website at www.nl-ind.com.
Business
Summary
We are
primarily a holding company. We operate in the component products
industry through our majority-owned subsidiary, CompX International Inc. (NYSE:
CIX). We operate in the chemicals industry through our
non-controlling interest in Kronos Worldwide, Inc. CompX (NYSE: CIX)
and Kronos (NYSE: KRO), each file periodic reports with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”).
Organization
We are
majority-owned by Valhi, Inc. (NYSE: VHI). At December 31,
2008, Valhi owned approximately 83% of our outstanding common
stock. Subsidiaries of Contran Corporation owned approximately 94% of
Valhi’s outstanding common stock at December 31, 2008. Substantially
all of Contran's outstanding voting stock is held by trusts established for the
benefit of certain children and grandchildren of Harold C. Simmons (for which
Mr. Simmons is the sole trustee) or is held directly by Mr. Simmons or other
persons or entities related to Mr. Simmons. Consequently, Mr. Simmons
may be deemed to control Contran, Valhi and us.
Forward-looking
Statements
This
Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, as amended.
Statements in this Annual Report that are not historical facts are
forward-looking in nature and represent management’s beliefs and assumptions
based on currently available information. In some cases, you can
identify forward-looking statements by the use of words such as "believes,"
"intends," "may," "should," "could," "anticipates," "expects" or comparable
terminology, or by discussions of strategies or trends. Although we
believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are
reasonable, we do not know if these expectations will be
correct. Such statements by their nature involve substantial risks
and uncertainties that could significantly impact expected results. Actual
future results could differ materially from those predicted. The
factors that could cause actual future results to differ materially from those
described herein are the risks and uncertainties discussed in this Annual Report
and those described from time to time in our other filings with the SEC include,
but are not limited to, the following:
·
|
Future
supply and demand for our products,
|
·
|
The
extent of the dependence of certain of our businesses on certain market
sectors,
|
·
|
The
cyclicality of our businesses (such as Kronos’ titanium dioxide pigments
(“TiO2”)
operations),
|
·
|
Customer
inventory levels (such as the extent to which Kronos’ customers may, from
time to time, accelerate purchases of TiO2 in
advance of anticipated price increases or defer purchases of TiO2 in
advance of anticipated price
decreases),
|
·
|
Changes
in raw material and other operating costs (such as energy and steel
costs),
|
·
|
General
global economic and political conditions (such as changes in the level of
gross domestic product in various regions of the world and the impact of
such changes on demand for, among other things, TiO2 and
component products),
|
·
|
Possible
disruption of our business or increases in the cost of doing business
resulting from terrorist activities or global
conflicts,
|
·
|
Competitive
products and substitute products, including increased competition from
low-cost manufacturing sources (such as
China),
|
·
|
Customer
and competitor strategies,
|
·
|
Potential
consolidation or solvency of our
competitors,
|
·
|
Demand
for office furniture,
|
·
|
Demand
for high performance marine
components,
|
·
|
The
impact of pricing and production
decisions,
|
·
|
Competitive
technology positions,
|
·
|
The
introduction of trade barriers,
|
·
|
Service
industry employment levels,
|
·
|
Fluctuations
in currency exchange rates (such as changes in the exchange rate between
the U.S. dollar and each of the euro, the Norwegian kroner, the Canadian
dollar and the New Taiwan dollar),
|
·
|
Operating
interruptions (including, but not limited to, labor disputes, leaks,
natural disasters, fires, explosions, unscheduled or unplanned downtime
and transportation interruptions),
|
·
|
The
timing and amounts of insurance
recoveries,
|
·
|
Our
ability to maintain sufficient
liquidity,
|
·
|
The
extent to which our subsidiaries were to become unable to pay us
dividends,
|
·
|
CompX’s
and Kronos’ ability to renew or refinance credit
facilities,
|
·
|
The
ultimate outcome of income tax audits, tax settlement initiatives or other
tax matters,
|
·
|
Potential
difficulties in integrating completed or future
acquisitions,
|
·
|
Decisions
to sell operating assets other than in the ordinary course of
business,
|
·
|
Uncertainties
associated with new product
development,
|
·
|
The
ultimate ability to utilize income tax attributes or changes in income tax
rates related to such attributes, the benefits of which have been
recognized under the more-likely-than-not recognition
criteria,
|
·
|
Environmental
matters (such as those requiring compliance with emission and discharge
standards for existing and new facilities or new developments regarding
environmental remediation at sites related to our former
operations),
|
·
|
Government
laws and regulations and possible changes therein (such as changes in
government regulations which might impose various obligations on present
and former manufacturers of lead pigment and lead-based paint, including
us, with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the use of
such products),
|
·
|
The
ultimate resolution of pending litigation (such as our lead pigment and
environmental matters), and
|
·
|
Possible
future litigation.
|
Should
one or more of these risks materialize or if the consequences of such a
development worsen, or should the underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual
results could differ materially from those currently forecasted or
expected. We disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise
any forward-looking statement whether as a result of changes in information,
future events or otherwise.
Operations
and equity investment
Information
regarding our operations and the companies conducting such operations is set
forth below. Geographic financial information is included in Note 3
to the Consolidated Financial Statements, which is incorporated herein by
reference.
Component
Products
CompX
International Inc. - 87%
owned
at December 31, 2008
|
CompX
is a leading manufacturer of security products, precision ball bearing
slides and ergonomic computer support systems used in the office
furniture, transportation, postal, tool storage, appliance and a variety
of other industries. CompX is also a leading manufacturer of
stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges and throttle controls for the
performance marine industry. CompX has production facilities in
North America and Asia.
|
|
|
Chemicals
Kronos
Worldwide, Inc. – 36%
owned
at December 31, 2008
|
Kronos
is a leading global producer and marketer of value-added TiO2
pigments, which are used for imparting whiteness, brightness and opacity
to a diverse range of customer applications and end-use markets, including
coatings, plastics, paper and other industrial and consumer
"quality-of-life" products. Kronos has production
facilities in Europe and North America. Sales of TiO2
represented about 90% of Kronos’ total sales in 2008, with sales of
other products that are complementary to Kronos’ TiO2
business comprising the
remainder.
|
COMPONENT
PRODUCTS - COMPX INTERNATIONAL INC.
Industry Overview
- Through our majority-owned subsidiary, CompX, we manufacture components
that are sold to a variety of industries including office furniture,
recreational transportation (including performance boats), mailboxes, tool
boxes, appliances, banking equipment, vending equipment, computers and related
equipment. Approximately 33% of CompX’s total sales in 2008 are to
the office furniture manufacturing industry, compared to 32% in 2007 and 36% in
2006. The decrease in the percentage of sales to the office furniture
industry from 2006 is partially the result of our strategy to diversify our
sales in order to strengthen our customer base. We believe that our
emphasis on new product features and sales of our products to additional markets
has resulted in our potential for higher rates of earnings growth and
diversification of risk.
Manufacturing,
Operations and Products – CompX’s Security Products business, with a
manufacturing facility in South Carolina and a facility in Illinois shared with
the Marine Components business, manufactures locking mechanisms and other
security products for sale to the postal, transportation, office furniture,
banking, vending, and other industries. We believe that CompX is a
North American market leader in the manufacture and sale of cabinet locks and
other locking mechanisms. CompX’s security products are used in a
variety of applications including ignition systems, mailboxes, vending and
gaming machines, parking meters, electrical circuit panels, storage
compartments, office furniture and medical cabinet security. These
products include:
·
|
disc
tumbler locks which provide moderate security and generally represent the
lowest cost lock to produce;
|
·
|
pin
tumbler locking mechanisms which are more costly to produce and are used
in applications requiring higher levels of security, including CompX’s
KeSet high
security system, which allows the user to change the keying on a single
lock 64 times without removing the lock from its enclosure;
and
|
·
|
innovative
eLock electronic locks which provide stand-alone security and audit trail
capability for drug storage and other valuables through the use of a
proximity card, magnetic stripe, or keypad
credentials.
|
A
substantial portion of CompX’s Security Products’ sales consist of products with
specialized adaptations to an individual manufacturer’s specifications, some of
which are listed above. CompX also has a standardized product line
suitable for many customers which is offered through a North American
distribution network to lock distributors and to smaller original equipment
manufacturers (“OEMs”) via its STOCK LOCKS distribution
program.
CompX’s
Furniture Components business, with facilities in Canada, Michigan and Taiwan,
manufactures a complete line of precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic
computer support systems for use in applications such as computer-related
equipment, appliances, tool storage cabinets, imaging equipment, file cabinets,
desk drawers, automated teller machines and other applications. These
products include:
·
|
the
patented Integrated
Slide Lock which allows a file cabinet manufacturer to reduce the
possibility of multiple drawers being opened at the same
time;
|
·
|
the
patented adjustable Ball
Lock which reduces the risk of heavily-filled drawers, such as auto
mechanic tool boxes, from opening while in
movement;
|
·
|
the
Self-Closing
Slide, which is designed to assist in closing a drawer and is used
in applications such as bottom-mount
freezers;
|
·
|
articulating
computer keyboard support arms (designed to attach to desks in the
workplace and home office environments to alleviate possible user strains
and stress and maximize usable workspace), along with the patented LeverLock keyboard arm,
which is designed to make ergonomic adjustments to the keyboard arm
easier;
|
·
|
CPU
storage devices which minimize adverse effects of dust and moisture;
and
|
·
|
complementary
accessories, such as ergonomic wrist rest aids, mouse pad supports and
flat screen computer monitor support
arms.
|
CompX’s
Marine Components business, with a facility in Wisconsin and a facility in
Illinois shared with the Security Products business, manufactures and
distributes marine instruments, hardware and accessories for performance
boats. CompX’s specialty marine component products are high
performance components designed to operate within precise tolerances in the
highly corrosive marine environment. These products
include:
·
|
original
equipment and aftermarket stainless steel exhaust headers, exhaust pipes,
mufflers and other exhaust components;
and
|
·
|
high
performance gauges such as GPS speedometers and
tachometers;
|
·
|
controls,
throttles, steering wheels and other billet accessories;
and
|
·
|
dash
panels, LED lighting, rigging and other
accessories.
|
CompX
operated six manufacturing facilities at December 31, 2008 including one
facility in Grayslake, Illinois that houses operations relating to Security
Products and Marine Components.
Security Products
|
|
Furniture Components
|
|
Marine Components
|
Mauldin,
SC
Grayslake,
IL
|
|
Kitchener,
Ontario
Byron
Center, MI
Taipei,
Taiwan
|
|
Neenah,
WI
Grayslake,
IL
|
Raw
Materials - CompX’s
primary raw materials are:
·
|
zinc,
copper and brass (used in the Security Products business for the
manufacture of locking mechanisms);
|
·
|
coiled
steel (used in the Furniture Components business for the manufacture of
precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support
systems);
|
·
|
stainless
steel (used in the Marine Components business for the manufacture of
exhaust headers, pipes and other components);
and
|
·
|
plastic
resins (primarily used in the Furniture Components business for injection
molded plastics in the manufacture of ergonomic computer support
systems).
|
These raw
materials are purchased from several suppliers and are readily available from
numerous sources.
CompX
occasionally enters into raw material arrangements to mitigate the short-term
impact of future increases in raw material costs. While these
arrangements do not necessarily commit us to a minimum volume of purchases, they
generally provide for stated unit prices based upon achievement of specified
purchase volumes. We utilize purchase arrangements to stabilize our
raw material prices provided we meet the specified minimum monthly purchase
quantities. Raw materials purchased outside of these arrangements are
sometimes subject to unanticipated and sudden price increases. Due to
the competitive nature of the markets served by our products, it is often
difficult to recover all increases in raw material costs through increased
product selling prices or raw material surcharges. Consequently,
overall operating margins can be affected by raw material cost
pressures. All of our primary raw materials are impacted by related
commodity markets where prices are cyclical, reflecting overall economic trends
and specific developments in consuming industries.
Patents and
Trademarks – CompX holds a number of
patents relating to component products, certain of which are believed to be
important to its continuing business activity. Patents generally have
a term of 20 years, and CompX’s patents have remaining terms ranging from less
than one year to 15 years at December 31, 2008. CompX’s major
trademarks and brand names include:
Furniture
Components
|
|
Security
Products
|
|
Marine
Components
|
CompX
Precision Slides®
|
|
CompX
Security Products®
|
|
Custom
Marine®
|
CompX
Waterloo®
|
|
National
Cabinet Lock®
|
|
Livorsi
Marine®
|
CompX
ErgonomX®
|
|
Fort
Lock®
|
|
CMI
Industrial Mufflers™
|
CompX
DurISLide®
|
|
Timberline®
|
|
Custom
Marine Stainless
|
Dynaslide®
|
|
Chicago
Lock®
|
|
Exhaust™
|
Waterloo
Furniture
|
|
STOCK
LOCKS®
|
|
The
#1 Choice in
|
Components
Limited®
|
|
KeSet®
|
|
Performance
Boating®
|
|
|
TuBar®
|
|
Mega
Rim™
|
|
|
CompX
eLock®
|
|
Race
Rim™
|
|
|
Lockview®
Software
|
|
CompX
Marine™
|
Sales, marketing
and distribution - CompX
sells components directly to large OEM customers through factory-based sales and
marketing professionals and with engineers working in concert with field
salespeople and independent manufacturers' representatives. CompX
selects manufacturers' representatives based on special skills in certain
markets or relationships with current or potential customers.
A
significant portion of CompX’s sales are also made through
distributors. CompX has a significant market share of cabinet lock
sales as a result of the locksmith distribution channel. CompX
supports distributor sales with a line of standardized products used by the
largest segments of the marketplace. These products are packaged and
merchandised for easy availability and handling by distributors and end
users. Due to CompX’s success with the STOCK LOCKS inventory program
within the Security Products business, similar programs have been implemented
for distributor sales of ergonomic computer support systems within the Furniture
Components business.
In 2008,
our ten largest customers accounted for approximately 35% of our total sales;
however, no one customer accounted for sales of 10% or more in
2008. Of the 35%, 15% was related to Security Products and 20% was
related to Furniture Components. Overall, our customer base is
diverse and the loss of a single customer would not have a material adverse
effect on our operations.
Competition
- CompX operates in highly competitive markets, and competes primarily on
the basis of product design, including ergonomic and aesthetic factors, product
quality and durability, price, on-time delivery, service and technical
support. CompX focuses efforts on the middle- and high-end segments
of the market, where product design, quality, durability and service are valued
by the customer.
CompX’s
Marine Components business competes with small domestic manufacturers and is
minimally affected by foreign competitors. The Security Products and
Furniture Components businesses compete against a number of domestic and foreign
manufacturers. Suppliers, particularly Asian-based furniture
component suppliers, have put intense price pressure on our Security Products
and Furniture Components products. In some cases, we have lost sales
to these lower-cost manufacturers. We have responded by
·
|
shifting
the manufacture of some products to our lower-cost
facilities;
|
·
|
working
to reduce costs and gain operational efficiencies through workforce
reductions and lean process improvements in all of our facilities;
and
|
·
|
working
with our customers to be their value-added supplier of choice by offering
customer support services which Asian-based suppliers are generally unable
to provide.
|
International
Operations - CompX
has substantial operations and assets located outside the United States,
principally Furniture Component operations in Canada and Taiwan. The
majority of our 2008 non-U.S. sales are to customers located in
Canada. These operations are subject to, among other things, currency
exchange rate fluctuations. Our results of operations have in the
past been both favorably and unfavorably affected by fluctuations in currency
exchange rates. Political and economic uncertainties in certain of
the countries in which we operate may expose us to risk of loss. We
do not believe that there is currently any likelihood of material loss through
political or economic instability, seizure, nationalization or similar
events. We cannot predict, however, whether events of this type in
the future could have a material effect on our operations. See Item 7
- "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations" and Item 7A – "Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market
Risk."
Regulatory and
Environmental Matters - CompX’s operations are subject to federal, state,
local and foreign laws and regulations relating to the use, storage, handling,
generation, transportation, treatment, emission, discharge, disposal,
remediation of and exposure to hazardous and non-hazardous substances, materials
and wastes ("Environmental Laws"). CompX’s operations are also
subject to federal, state, local and foreign laws and regulations relating to
worker health and safety. We believe that CompX is in substantial
compliance with all such laws and regulations. To date, the costs of
maintaining compliance with such laws and regulations have not significantly
impacted our results. We currently do not anticipate any significant
costs or expenses relating to such matters; however, it is possible future laws
and regulations may require us to incur significant additional
expenditures.
Employees - As of December 31, 2008,
CompX employed the
following number of people:
United
States
|
|
|
658 |
|
Canada(1)
|
|
|
237 |
|
Taiwan
|
|
|
81 |
|
Total
|
|
|
976 |
|
(1)
|
Approximately
75% of the Canadian employees are represented by a labor union covered by
a collective bargaining agreement. A new collective bargaining
agreement, providing for wage increases from 0% to 1%, was ratified in
January 2009 and expires January
2012.
|
We
believe our labor relations are good at all of our facilities.
CHEMICALS
- KRONOS WORLDWIDE, INC.
Business
Overview -
Kronos is a leading global producer and marketer of value-added titanium
dioxide pigments. Kronos, along with its distributors and agents,
sells and provides technical services for its products to over 4,000 customers
in approximately 100 countries with the majority of sales in Europe and North
America. We believe that Kronos has developed considerable expertise
and efficiency in the manufacture, sale, shipment and service of its products in
domestic and international markets.
TiO2 is an
inorganic pigment used to impart whiteness, brightness and opacity for products
such as coatings, plastics, paper, fibers, food, ceramics and
cosmetics. TiO2 is
considered a “quality-of-life” product with demand and growth affected by gross
domestic product and overall economic conditions in markets in various parts of
the world. TiO2 derives
its value from its whitening properties and hiding power (opacity), which is the
ability to cover or mask other materials effectively and
efficiently. TiO2 is the
largest commercially-used whitening pigment because it has a high refractive
rating giving it more hiding power than any other commercially-produced white
pigment. In addition, TiO2 has
excellent resistance to interaction with other chemicals, good thermal stability
and resistance to ultraviolet degradation. Kronos ships TiO2 to
customers in either a powder or slurry form via rail, truck or ocean
carrier. Kronos, including its predecessors, has produced and
marketed TiO2 in North
America and Europe for over 80 years.
We
believe that Kronos is the second-largest producer of TiO2 in Europe
with an estimated 19% share of European TiO2 sales
volume. Approximately one-half of Kronos’ 2008 sales volumes were
attributable to markets in Europe. Kronos has an estimated 16% share
of North American TiO2 sales
volume. Per capita utilization of TiO2 in the
United States and Western Europe far exceeds that of other areas in the
world. We expect these markets to continue to be the largest
consumers of TiO2 for the
foreseeable future. It is probable that significant markets for
TiO2
could emerge in other areas of the world. China continues to develop
into a significant market and as its economy continues to mature it is probable
that quality-of-life products, including TiO2, will
experience greater demand in that country. In addition, growth in
recent years in Eastern Europe and the Far East has been significant as the
economies in these regions continue developing to the point that quality-of-life
products, including TiO2,
experience greater demand.
Sales of
TiO2
were about 90% of Kronos’ net sales in 2008. The remaining 10% of net
sales is made up of other product lines that are complementary to TiO2. These
other products are described as follows:
·
|
Kronos
owns and operates an ilmenite mine in Norway pursuant to a governmental
concession with an unlimited term, and Kronos is currently excavating a
second mine located near the first mine. Ilmenite is a raw
material used directly as a feedstock by some sulfate-process TiO2
plants, including all of Kronos’ European sulfate-process
plants. Kronos also sells ilmenite ore to third-parties, some
of which are its competitors. The mines have estimated
aggregate reserves that are expected to last for at least another 60
years.
|
·
|
Kronos
manufactures and sells iron-based chemicals that are co-products and
processed co-products of TiO2
pigment production. These co-product chemicals are marketed
through Kronos’ Ecochem division and are used primarily as treatment and
conditioning agents for industrial effluents and municipal wastewater as
well as in the manufacture of iron pigments, cement and agricultural
products.
|
·
|
Kronos
manufactures and sells titanium oxychloride and titanyl sulfate which are
side-stream products from the production of TiO2. Titanium
oxychloride is used in specialty applications in the formulation of
pearlescent pigments and in the production of electroceramic capacitors
for cell phones and other electronic devices. Titanyl sulfate
products are used primarily in pearlescent
pigments.
|
Manufacturing and
operation - Kronos currently produces over 40 different TiO2 grades
under the KronosTM
trademark which provide a variety of performance properties to meet customers’
specific requirements. Kronos’ major customers include domestic and
international paint, plastics and paper manufacturers.
Extenders,
such as kaolin clays, calcium carbonate and polymeric opacifiers, are used in a
number of the same end-use markets as white pigments. However, the opacity in
these products is not able to duplicate the performance characteristics of
TiO2,
and so we believe these products are not effective substitutes for TiO2.
Kronos
produces TiO2
in two crystalline forms: rutile and anatase. Rutile TiO2 is
manufactured using both a chloride production process and a sulfate production
process, whereas anatase TiO2 is only
produced using a sulfate production process. Chloride process rutile
is preferred for the majority of customer applications. From a
technical standpoint, chloride process rutile has a bluer undertone and higher
durability than sulfate process rutile. Although many end-use
applications can use either form, chloride process rutile is the preferred form
for use in coatings and plastics, the two largest end-use
markets. Sulfate process anatase represents a much smaller percentage
of annual global TiO2 production
and is preferred for use in selected paper, ceramics, rubber tires, man-made
fibers, food and cosmetics.
Chloride production
process -
Approximately three-fourths of Kronos’ current production capacity is based on
the chloride process. The chloride process is a continuous process in
which chlorine is used to extract rutile TiO2. The
chloride process typically has lower manufacturing costs than the sulfate
process due to newer technology, higher yield, less waste, lower energy
requirements and lower labor costs. The chloride process produces
less waste than the sulfate process because much of the chlorine is recycled and
feedstock bearing higher titanium content is used.
Sulfate production process -
The sulfate process is a batch chemical process that uses sulfuric acid to
extract both rutile and anatase TiO2.
Once an
intermediate TiO2 pigment
has been produced by either the chloride or sulfate process, it is “finished”
into products with specific performance characteristics for particular end-use
applications through proprietary processes involving various chemical surface
treatments and intensive micronizing (milling). Due to environmental
factors and customer considerations, the proportion of TiO2 industry
sales represented by chloride process pigments has increased relative to sulfate
process pigments and, in 2007, chloride process production facilities
represented approximately 60% of industry capacity.
Kronos
produced 514,000 metric tons of TiO2 in 2008,
up slightly from the 512,000 metric tons produced in 2007. Such
production amounts include Kronos’ 50% interest in the TiO2
manufacturing joint-venture discussed below. Kronos’ average
production capacity utilization rates were near-full capacity in 2006, 2007 and
2008. Kronos’ production capacity has increased by approximately 30%
over the past ten years due to debottlenecking programs, with only moderate
capital expenditures. We believe that Kronos’ annual attainable
production capacity for 2009 is approximately 532,000 metric tons; however, we
do expect that Kronos’ production volumes in 2009 will be significantly lower
than its attainable capacity.
Raw materials
- The primary raw materials used in chloride process TiO2 are
titanium-containing feedstock (natural rutile ore or purchased slag), chlorine
and coke. Chlorine and coke are available from a number of
suppliers. Titanium-containing feedstock suitable for use in the
chloride process is available from a limited but increasing number of suppliers
principally in Australia, South Africa, Canada, India and the United
States. Kronos purchases chloride process grade slag from Rio Tinto
Iron and Titanium under a long-term supply contract that expires at the end of
2011. Kronos purchases natural rutile ore primarily from Iluka
Resources, Limited under a long-term supply contract that expires at the end of
2009. Kronos expects to be successful in obtaining long-term
extensions to these and other existing supply contracts prior to their
expiration. We expect the raw materials purchased under these
contracts to meet Kronos’ chloride process feedstock requirements over the next
several years.
The
primary raw materials used in sulfate process TiO2 are
titanium-containing feedstock (primarily ilmenite from our Norwegian mine or
purchased slag) and sulfuric acid. Sulfuric acid is available from a
number of suppliers. Titanium-containing feedstock suitable for use
in the sulfate process is available from a limited number of suppliers
principally in Norway, Canada, Australia, India and South Africa. As
one of the few vertically- integrated producers of sulfate process TiO2, Kronos
owns and operates a rock ilmenite mine in Norway, which provided all of the
feedstock for its European sulfate process TiO2 plants in
2008. We expect that ilmenite production from the mine will meet
Kronos’ European sulfate process feedstock requirements for the foreseeable
future. For Kronos’ Canadian sulfate process plant, Kronos also
purchases sulfate grade slag primarily from Q.I.T. Fer et Titane Inc. (also a
subsidiary of Rio Tinto Iron and Titanium) under a long-term supply contract
that expires at the end of 2009 and Tinfos Titan and Iron KS under a supply
contract that expires in 2010. We expect that the raw materials
purchased under these contracts will meet Kronos’ sulfate process feedstock
requirements over the next few years.
Many of
Kronos’ raw material contracts contain fixed quantities it is required to
purchase, although these contracts allow for an upward or downward adjustment in
the quantity purchased. The pricing under these agreements is
generally negotiated annually.
The following table summarizes raw
materials Kronos purchased or mined in 2008.
Production Process/Raw
Material
|
Raw Materials Procured or
Mined
|
|
(In
thousands of metric tons)
|
|
|
Chloride
process plants:
|
|
Purchased
slag or natural rutile ore
|
422
|
|
|
Sulfate
process plants:
|
|
Raw
ilmenite ore mined & used internally
|
305
|
Purchased
slag
|
30
|
TiO2 manufacturing
joint venture -
Kronos holds a 50% interest in a manufacturing joint venture with
Huntsman Corporation (Huntsman). The joint venture owns and operates
a chloride process TiO2 facility
located in Lake Charles, Louisiana. Kronos shares production from the
plant equally with Huntsman pursuant to separate offtake
agreements.
A
supervisory committee directs the business and affairs of the joint venture,
including production and output decisions. This committee is composed
of four members, two of whom Kronos appoints and two of whom Huntsman
appoints. Two general managers manage the operations of the joint
venture acting under the direction of the supervisory
committee. Kronos appoints one general manager and Huntsman appoints
the other.
Kronos is
required to purchase one-half of the TiO2 produced
by the joint venture. The joint venture is not consolidated in
Kronos’ financial statements because Kronos does not control
it. Kronos accounts for its interest in the joint venture by the
equity method. The joint venture operates on a break-even basis, and
therefore Kronos does not have any equity in earnings of the joint
venture. Kronos shares all costs and capital expenditures of the
joint venture equally with Huntsman with the exception of raw material and
packaging costs for the pigment grades produced. Kronos’ share of the
net costs is reported as cost of sales as the related TiO2 is
sold.
Competition
– The TiO2 industry
is highly competitive. Kronos’ principal competitors are E.I. du Pont
de Nemours & Co.; Millennium Inorganic Chemicals, Inc. (a subsidiary of
National Titanium Dioxide Company Ltd. (Cristal)); Tronox Incorporated;
Huntsman; and Ishihara Sangyo Kaisha, Ltd. These competitors have
estimated individual shares of TiO2 production
capacity ranging from 4% (for Ishihara) to 22% (for DuPont), and an estimated
aggregate share of worldwide TiO2 production
volume in excess of 60%. DuPont has about one-half of total North
American TiO2 production
capacity and is Kronos’ principal North American competitor. Tronox
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in January 2009, and it is unclear
how and to what extent Tronox or a successor will compete in the TiO2 industry
at the conclusion of Tronox’s bankruptcy proceedings.
Kronos
competes primarily on the basis of price, product quality, technical service and
the availability of high-performance pigment grades. Although certain
TiO2
grades are considered specialty pigments, the majority of Kronos’ grades and
substantially all of Kronos’ production are considered commodity pigments with
price generally being the most significant competitive factor. We
believe that Kronos is the leading seller of TiO2 in several
countries, including Germany, with an estimated 11% share of worldwide TiO2 sales
volume in 2008. Overall, Kronos is the world’s fifth-largest producer
of TiO2.
Over the
past ten years, Kronos and its competitors have increased industry capacity
through debottlenecking projects. Given the current economic
environment and reduced industry demand, we do not expect any significant
efforts will be undertaken by Kronos or its competitors to further increase
capacity through such projects in the foreseeable future. In
addition, Huntsman announced the closure of one of its European
facilities. Kronos believes further shutdowns or closures in the
industry are possible. Even with these reductions in industry
capacity, capacity utilization rates by Kronos and its competitors are expected
to be lower in 2009 as compared to 2008 in response to a reduction in
industry-wide demand, which in turn will result in downward pressure on average
TiO2
selling prices. Once the economic environment improves and
industry-wide demand increases, the expected reduction in industry-wide capacity
through plant shutdowns should have a favorable impact on production capacity
utilization, selling prices and profitability. However, the
volatility of the near-term economic environment makes it difficult to forecast
future demand. If actual developments differ from expectations,
Kronos and the TiO2 industry's
performances could continue to be unfavorably affected longer than
expected.
Worldwide
capacity additions in the TiO2 market
resulting from construction of new plants require significant capital
expenditures and substantial lead time (typically three to five
years). We are not aware of any TiO2 plants
currently under construction, and we believe that it is not likely any new
plants will be constructed in the foreseeable future.
Research and
development – Kronos’
research and development activities are directed primarily on improving the
chloride and sulfate production processes, improving product quality and
strengthening Kronos’ competitive position by developing new pigment
applications. Kronos conducts research and development activities at
its Leverkusen, Germany facility. Kronos’ expenditures for research
and development and certain technical support programs were approximately $11
million in 2006 and $12 million in each of 2007 and 2008. Kronos
plans to scale back its research and development activities in 2009 due to the
current adverse economic environment, consequently research and development
expenditures in 2009 are expected to be lower as compared to recent
history.
Kronos
continually seeks to improve the quality of its grades and has been successful
at developing new grades for existing and new applications to meet the needs of
customers and increase product life cycle. Since 2002, Kronos has
added 15 new grades for plastics, coatings, fibers and paper laminate
applications.
Patents and
trademarks - We
believe that Kronos’ patents held for products and production processes are
important to us and Kronos’ continuing business activities. Kronos
seeks patent protection for technical developments, principally in the United
States, Canada and Europe, and from time to time enters into licensing
arrangements with third parties. Kronos’ existing patents generally
have terms of 20 years from the date of filing, and have remaining terms ranging
from 1 to 19 years. Kronos seeks to protect its intellectual property
rights, including its patent rights, and from time to time Kronos engages in
disputes relating to the protection and use of intellectual property relating to
its products.
Kronos’
trademarks, including KronosTM,
are protected by registration in the United States and elsewhere with respect to
those products Kronos manufactures and sells. Kronos also relies on
unpatented proprietary knowledge, continuing technological innovation and other
trade secrets to develop and maintain competitive position. Kronos’
proprietary chloride production process is an important part of its technology,
and Kronos’ business could be harmed if it failed to maintain confidentiality of
trade secrets used in this technology.
Customer base and
seasonality - Kronos sells to a diverse customer base, and no single
customer made up more than 10% of sales for 2008. Kronos’ largest ten
customers accounted for approximately 27% of sales in 2008.
Neither
Kronos’ business as a whole, nor any of its principal product groups is seasonal
to any significant extent. However, TiO2 sales are
generally higher in the first half of the year. This is due in part
to the increase in paint production in the spring to meet demand during the
spring and summer painting season.
Employees
- As of
December 31, 2008, Kronos employed approximately 2,450 persons (excluding
employees of the Louisiana joint venture), with 50 employees in the United
States, 400 employees in Canada and 2,000 employees in Europe.
Kronos’
hourly employees in production facilities worldwide, including the TiO2 joint
venture, are represented by a variety of labor unions under labor agreements
with various expiration dates. Kronos’ European Union employees are
covered by master collective bargaining agreements in the chemicals industry
that are generally renewed annually. Kronos’ Canadian union employees
are covered by a collective bargaining agreement that expires in June
2010.
Regulatory and
environmental matters – Kronos’ operations are governed by various
environmental laws and regulations. Certain of Kronos’ operations
are, or have been, engaged in the handling, manufacture or use of substances or
compounds that may be considered toxic or hazardous within the meaning of
applicable environmental laws and regulations. As with other
companies engaged in similar businesses, certain past and current operations and
products of Kronos have the potential to cause environmental or other
damage. Kronos has implemented and continues to implement various
policies and programs in an effort to minimize these risks. Kronos’
policy is to maintain compliance with applicable environmental laws and
regulations at all of its facilities and to strive to improve our environmental
performance. It is possible that future developments, such as
stricter requirements in environmental laws and enforcement policies, could
adversely affect Kronos’ production, handling, use, storage, transportation,
sale or disposal of such substances and could adversely effect Kronos’
consolidated financial position and results of operations or
liquidity.
Kronos’
U.S. manufacturing operations are governed by federal environmental and worker
health and safety laws and regulations. These primarily consist of
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), the Occupational Safety and
Health Act, the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act,
the Toxic Substances Control Act and the Comprehensive Environmental Response,
Compensation and Liability Act, as amended by the Superfund Amendments and
Reauthorization Act (“CERCLA”), as well as the state counterparts of these
statutes. We believe the TiO2 plant
owned by the joint venture and a TiO2 slurry
facility Kronos owns in Lake Charles, Louisiana are in substantial compliance
with applicable requirements of these laws or compliance orders issued there
under. These are Kronos’ only U.S. manufacturing
facilities.
While the
laws regulating operations of industrial facilities in Europe vary from country
to country, a common regulatory framework is provided by the
EU. Germany and Belgium are members of the EU and follow its
initiatives. Norway is not a member but generally patterns its
environmental regulatory actions after the EU. We believe that Kronos
has obtained all required permits and is in substantial compliance with
applicable environmental requirements for its European and Canadian
facilities.
At
Kronos’ sulfate plant facilities in Germany, Kronos recycles weak sulfuric acid
either through contracts with third parties or at its own
facilities. In addition, at its German locations Kronos has a
contract with a third party to treat certain sulfate-process
effluents. At its Norwegian plant, Kronos ships spent acid to a third
party location where it is used as a neutralization agent. These
contracts may be terminated by either party after giving three or four years
advance notice, depending on the contract.
From time
to time, Kronos’ facilities may be subject to environmental regulatory
enforcement under U.S. and foreign statutes. Typically Kronos
establishes compliance programs to resolve these
matters. Occasionally, Kronos may pay penalties. To date
such penalties have not involved amounts having a material adverse effect on
Kronos’ consolidated financial position, results of operations or
liquidity. We believe that all of Kronos’ facilities are in
substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws.
In
December 2006, the EU approved Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of
Chemicals (“REACH”), which took effect on June 1, 2007 and will be phased in
over 11 years. Under REACH, companies that manufacture or import more
than one ton of a chemical substance per year will be required to register such
chemical substances in a central data base. REACH affects Kronos’
European operations by imposing a testing, evaluation and registration program
for many of the chemicals Kronos uses or produces in Europe. Kronos
has established a REACH team that is working to identify and list all substances
purchased, manufactured or imported by or for Kronos in the
EU. Kronos spent $.4 million in 2007 and $.5 million in 2008 on REACH
compliance, and we do not anticipate that future compliance costs will be
material to Kronos.
Kronos’
capital expenditures in 2008 related to ongoing environmental compliance,
protection and improvement programs were $11.9 million, and are currently
expected to be approximately $1 million in 2009.
OTHER
In addition to our 87% ownership of
CompX and our 36% ownership of Kronos at December 31, 2008, we also own 100% of
EWI Re. Inc., an insurance brokerage and risk management services
company. We also hold certain marketable securities and other
investments. See Notes 4 and 17 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Regulatory and
environmental matters –
We have discussed regulatory and environmental matters in the respective
business sections contained elsewhere herein and in Item 3 - "Legal
Proceedings." In addition, the information included in Note 19 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements under the captions "Lead pigment litigation"
and "Environmental matters and litigation" is incorporated herein by
reference.
Insurance
– We maintain insurance for our businesses and operations, with customary
levels of coverage, deductibles and limits. See also Item 3 – “Legal
Proceedings – Insurance coverage claims” and Note 17 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Business Strategy
– We
routinely compare our liquidity requirements and alternative uses of capital
against the estimated future cash flows we expect to receive from our
subsidiaries and affiliates. As a result of this process, we have in
the past and may in the future seek to raise additional capital, incur debt,
repurchase indebtedness in the market or otherwise, modify our dividend
policies, consider the sale of our interests in our subsidiaries, affiliates,
business units, marketable securities or other assets, or take a combination of
these and other steps, to increase liquidity, reduce indebtedness and fund
future activities. Such activities have in the past and may in the
future involve related companies. From time to time, we also evaluate
the restructuring of ownership interests among our respective subsidiaries and
related companies.
We and other entities that may be
deemed to be controlled by or that are affiliated with Mr. Harold C. Simmons
routinely evaluate acquisitions of interests in, or combinations with,
companies, including related companies, perceived by management to be
undervalued in the marketplace. These companies may or may not be
engaged in businesses related to our current businesses. In some
instances, we have actively managed the businesses acquired with a focus on
maximizing return-on-investment through cost reductions, capital expenditures,
improved operating efficiencies, selective marketing to address market niches,
disposition of marginal operations, use of leverage and redeployment of capital
to more productive assets. In other instances, we have disposed of
the acquired interest in a company prior to gaining control. We
intend to consider such activities in the future and may, in connection with
such activities, consider issuing additional equity securities and increasing
our indebtedness.
Available
information – Our fiscal year ends December 31. We furnish our
shareholders with annual reports containing audited financial
statements. In addition, we file annual, quarterly and current
reports, proxy and information statements and other information with the
SEC. Our consolidated subsidiary (CompX) and our significant equity
method investee (Kronos) also file annual, quarterly, and current reports, proxy
and information statements and other information with the SEC. We
also make our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q,
current reports on Form 8-K and amendments thereto, available free of charge
through our website at www.nl-ind.com as
soon as reasonably practicable after they have been filed with the
SEC. We also provide to anyone, without charge, copies of such
documents upon written request. Such requests should be directed to
the attention of the Corporate Secretary at our address on the cover page of
this Form 10-K.
Additional
information, including our Audit Committee charter, our Code of Business Conduct
and Ethics and our Corporate Governance Guidelines can be found on our
website. Information contained on our website is not part of this
Annual Report.
The
general public may read and copy any materials we file with the SEC at the SEC’s
Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The
public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by
calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. We are an electronic
filer. The SEC maintains an Internet website at www.sec.gov that
contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information
regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including
us.
ITEM
1A. RISK FACTORS
Listed below are certain risk factors
associated with us and our businesses. In addition to the potential
effect of these risk factors discussed below, any risk factor which could result
in reduced earnings or operating losses, or reduced liquidity, could in turn
adversely affect our ability to service our liabilities or pay dividends on our
common stock or adversely affect the quoted market prices for our
securities.
We
could incur significant costs related to legal and environmental
matters.
We
formerly manufactured lead pigments for use in paint. We and others
have been named as defendants in various legal proceedings seeking damages for
personal injury, property damage and governmental expenditures allegedly caused
by the use of lead-based paints. These lawsuits seek recovery under a
variety of theories, including public and private nuisance, negligent product
design, negligent failure to warn, strict liability, breach of warranty,
conspiracy/concert of action, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, market
share or risk contribution liability, intentional tort, fraud and
misrepresentation, violations of state consumer protection statutes, supplier
negligence and similar claims. The plaintiffs in these actions
generally seek to impose on the defendants responsibility for lead paint
abatement and health concerns associated with the use of lead-based paints,
including damages for personal injury, contribution and/or indemnification for
medical expenses, medical monitoring expenses and costs for educational
programs. As with all legal proceedings, the outcome is
uncertain. Any liability we might incur in the future could be
material. See also Item 3 - “Legal Proceedings – Lead pigment
litigation.”
Certain
properties and facilities used in our former operations are the subject of
litigation, administrative proceedings or investigations arising under various
environmental laws. These proceedings seek cleanup costs, personal
injury or property damages and/or damages for injury to natural
resources. Some of these proceedings involve claims for substantial
amounts. Environmental obligations are difficult to assess and
estimate for numerous reasons, and we may incur costs for environmental
remediation in the future in excess of amounts currently estimated. Any
liability we might incur in the future could be material. See also
Item 3 - “Legal Proceedings – Environmental matters and
litigation.”
Our assets consist primarily of
investments in our operating subsidiaries and affiliates, and we are dependent
upon distributions from our subsidiaries and affiliates.
The
majority of our operating cash flows are generated by our operating
subsidiaries, and our ability to service liabilities and to pay dividends on our
common stock depends to a large extent upon the cash dividends or other
distributions we receive from our subsidiaries and affiliates. Our
subsidiaries and affiliates are separate and distinct legal entities and they
have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay such cash dividends or other
distributions to us. In addition, the payment of dividends or other
distributions from our subsidiaries could be subject to restrictions on or
taxation of dividends or repatriation of earnings under applicable law, monetary
transfer restrictions, foreign currency exchange regulations in jurisdictions in
which our subsidiaries operate, any other restrictions imposed by current or
future agreements to which our subsidiaries may be a party, including debt
instruments. Events beyond our control, including changes in general
business and economic conditions, could adversely impact the ability of our
subsidiaries to pay dividends or make other distributions to us. If
our subsidiaries were to become unable to make sufficient cash dividends or
other distributions to us, our ability to service our liabilities and to pay
dividends on our common stock could be adversely affected.
In this
regard, in the first quarter of 2009 Kronos announced the suspension of its
regularly quarterly dividend in consideration of the challenges and
opportunities that exist in the TiO2 pigment
industry. We currently believe that we will have sufficient liquidity
to service our liabilities in 2009. See Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations –
Liquidity.”
In February 2009, our Board of
Directors declared a first quarter 2009 cash dividend of $.125 per share to
shareholders of record as of March 10, 2009 to be paid on March 26,
2009. However, the declaration and payment of future dividends, and
the amount thereof, is discretionary and is dependent upon our results of
operations, financial condition, cash requirements for businesses, contractual
restrictions and other factors deemed relevant by our Board of
Directors. The amount and timing of past dividends is not necessarily
indicative of the amount or timing of any future dividends which might be
paid. There are currently no contractual restrictions on the amount
of dividends which we may pay.
In
addition, a significant portion of our assets consist of ownership interests in
our subsidiaries and affiliates. If we were required to liquidate any
of such securities in order to generate funds to satisfy our liabilities, we may
be required to sell such securities at a time or times at which we would not be
able to realize what we believe to be the actual value of such assets.
Many of the markets in which we
operate are mature and highly competitive resulting in pricing pressure and the
need to continuously reduce costs.
Many of
the markets CompX and Kronos serve are highly competitive, with a number of
competitors offering similar products. CompX focuses efforts on the
middle and high-end segment of the market where we feel that we can compete due
to the importance of product design, quality and durability to the
customer. However, our ability to effectively compete is impacted by
a number of factors. The occurrence of any of these factors could
result in reduced earnings or operating losses.
·
|
Competitors
may be able to drive down prices for our products because their costs are
lower than our costs, especially those located in
Asia.
|
·
|
Competitors'
financial, technological and other resources may be greater than our
resources, which may enable them to more effectively withstand changes in
market conditions.
|
·
|
Competitors
may be able to respond more quickly than we can to new or emerging
technologies and changes in customer
requirements.
|
·
|
Consolidation
of our competitors or customers in any of the markets in which we compete
may result in reduced demand for our
products.
|
·
|
New
competitors could emerge by modifying their existing production facilities
to manufacture products that compete with our
products.
|
·
|
Our
ability to sustain a cost structure that enables us to be
cost-competitive.
|
·
|
Our
ability to adjust costs relative to our
pricing.
|
·
|
Customers
may no longer value our product design, quality or durability over lower
cost products of our competitors.
|
Demand
for, and prices of, certain of Kronos’ products are influenced by changing
market conditions and Kronos is currently operating in a depressed worldwide
market for its products, which may result in reduced earnings or operating
losses.
A
significant portion of our net income is attributable to sales of TiO2 by
Kronos. Approximately 90% of Kronos’ revenues are attributable to
sales of TiO2. Pricing
within the global TiO2 industry
over the long term is cyclical, and changes in economic conditions, especially
in Western industrialized nations, can significantly impact our earnings and
operating cash flows. The current world-wide economic downturn has
depressed sales volumes in the fourth quarter of 2008, and we are unable to
predict with a high degree of certainty when demand will return to the levels
experience prior to the fourth quarter of 2008. This may result in
reduced earnings or operating losses.
Historically,
the markets for many of Kronos’ products have experienced alternating periods of
increasing and decreasing demand. Relative changes in the selling
prices for Kronos’ products are one of the main factors that affect the level of
its profitability. In periods of increasing demand, Kronos’ selling
prices and profit margins generally will tend to increase, while in periods of
decreasing demand Kronos’ selling prices and profit margins generally tend to
decrease. Huntsman announced the closure of one of its European
facilities, and we believe that further shutdowns or closures in the industry
are possible. The closures may not be sufficient to alleviate the
current excess industry capacity and such conditions may be further aggravated
by anticipated or unanticipated capacity additions or other events.
The
demand for TiO2 during a
given year is also subject to seasonal fluctuations. TiO2 sales are
generally higher in the first half of the year. This is due in part
to the increase in paint production in the spring to meet demand during the
spring and summer painting season.
Higher
costs or limited availability of our raw materials may decrease our
liquidity.
Certain
of the raw materials used in CompX’s products are commodities that are subject
to significant fluctuations in price in response to world wide supply and
demand. Coiled steel is the major raw material used in the
manufacture of precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support
systems. Plastic resins for injection molded plastics are also an
integral material for ergonomic computer support systems. Zinc is a
principal raw material used in the manufacture of security
products. Stainless steel tubing is the major raw material used in
the manufacture of marine exhaust systems. These raw materials are
purchased from several suppliers and are generally readily available from
numerous sources. We occasionally enter into raw material supply
arrangements to mitigate the short-term impact of future increases in raw
material costs. Materials purchased outside of these arrangements are
sometimes subject to unanticipated and sudden price increases. Should
our vendors not be able to meet their contractual obligations or should we be
otherwise unable to obtain necessary raw materials, we may incur higher costs
for raw materials or may be required to reduce production levels, either of
which may decrease our liquidity as we may be unable to offset the higher costs
with increased selling prices for our products.
Our development of innovative
features for our current component products is critical to sustaining and
growing our sales.
Historically,
CompX’s ability to provide value-added custom engineered component products that
address requirements of technology and space utilization has been a key element
of its success. We spend a significant amount of time and effort to
refine, improve and adapt our existing products for new customers and
applications. Since expenditures for these types of activities are
not considered research and development expense under accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States of America, the amount of our research
and development expenditures, which is not significant, is not indicative of the
overall effort involved in the development of new product features. The
introduction of new products and features requires the coordination of the
design, manufacturing and marketing of such products with potential
customers. The ability to coordinate these activities may be affected
by factors beyond CompX’s control. While we will continue to
emphasize the introduction of innovative new product features that target
customer-specific opportunities, we cannot assure you that any new products
CompX introduces will achieve the same degree of success that it has achieved
with its existing products. Introduction of new products typically
requires us to increase production volume on a timely basis while maintaining
product quality. Manufacturers often encounter difficulties in
increasing production volumes, including delays, quality control problems and
shortages of qualified personnel. As CompX attempts to introduce new
product features in the future, we cannot assure you that CompX will be able to
increase production volume without encountering these or other problems, which
might negatively impact our financial condition or results of
operations.
Recent
and future acquisitions could subject us to a number of operational
risks.
A key
component of CompX’s strategy is to grow and diversify its business through
acquisitions. Our ability to successfully execute this component of
our strategy entails a number of risks, including:
·
|
the
identification of suitable growth
opportunities;
|
·
|
an
inaccurate assessment of acquired
liabilities;
|
·
|
the
entry into markets in which we may have limited or no
experience;
|
·
|
the
diversion of management’s attention from our core
businesses;
|
·
|
the
potential loss of key employees or customers of the acquired
businesses;
|
·
|
difficulties
in realizing projected efficiencies, synergies and cost savings;
and
|
·
|
an
increase in our indebtedness and a limitation in our ability to access
additional capital when needed.
|
Kronos’
leverage may impair our financial condition or limit our ability to operate our
businesses.
As of
December 31, 2008, Kronos had consolidated debt of approximately $638.5 million,
the majority of which relates to Senior Secured Notes, a revolving credit
facility of its wholly-owned subsidiary, Kronos International, Inc. and a note
payable to us. Kronos’ level of debt could have important
consequences to its stockholders (including us) and creditors,
including:
·
|
making
it more difficult for Kronos to satisfy its obligations with respect to
its liabilities;
|
·
|
increasing
its vulnerability to adverse general economic and industry
conditions;
|
·
|
requiring
that a portion of Kronos’ cash flows from operations be used for the
payment of interest on its debt, which reduces its ability to use cash
flow to fund working capital, capital expenditures, dividends on our
common stock, acquisitions or general corporate
requirements;
|
·
|
limiting
its ability to obtain additional financing to fund future working capital,
capital expenditures, dividends on its common stock, acquisitions or
general corporate requirements;
|
·
|
limiting
its flexibility in planning for, or reacting to, changes in Kronos’
business and the industry in which it operates;
and
|
·
|
placing
it at a competitive disadvantage relative to other less leveraged
competitors.
|
In
addition to Kronos’ indebtedness, Kronos is party to various lease and other
agreements pursuant to which it is committed to pay approximately $365.5 million
in 2009. Kronos’ ability to make payments on and refinance its debt,
and to fund planned capital expenditures, depends on Kronos’ future ability to
generate cash flow. To some extent, this is subject to general
economic, financial, competitive, legislative, regulatory and other factors that
are beyond our control. In addition, Kronos’ ability to borrow funds
under its subsidiaries’ credit facilities in the future will in some instances
depend in part on these subsidiaries’ ability to maintain specified financial
ratios and satisfy certain financial covenants contained in the applicable
credit agreement. In this regard, we currently believe it is probable
that one of Kronos’ required financial ratios associated with its European
credit facility will not be maintained at some point during 2009, most likely
commencing at March 31, 2009.
Kronos
has begun discussions with the lenders to amend the terms of the existing
European credit facility to eliminate the requirement to maintain this financial
ratio until at least March 31, 2010. While we believe it is possible
that Kronos can obtain such an amendment to eliminate this financial ratio
through at least March 31, 2010, there is no assurance that such amendment will
be obtained, or if obtained that the requirement to maintain the financial ratio
will be eliminated (or waived, in the event the lenders would only agree to a
waiver and not an amendment to eliminate the covenant itself) through at least
March 31, 2010. Any such amendment or waiver which Kronos might
obtain could increase Kronos’ future borrowing costs, either from a requirement
that it pay a higher rate of interest on outstanding borrowings or pay a fee to
the lenders as part of agreeing to such amendment or waiver.
In the
event that Kronos would not be successful in obtaining the amendment or waiver
of the existing European credit facility to eliminate the requirement to
maintain the financial ratio, it would seek to refinance such facility with a
new group of lenders with terms that did not include such financial covenant or,
if required, it will use existing liquidity resources (which could include funds
provided by affiliates). While there is no assurance that Kronos
would be able to refinance the existing European credit facility with a new
group of lenders, we believe these other sources of liquidity available to
Kronos would allow it to refinance the existing European credit
facility. If required, Kronos believes by undertaking one or more of
these steps it will be successful in maintaining sufficient liquidity to meet
its future obligations including operations, capital expenditures and debt
service for the next 12 months.
Kronos’
business may not generate cash flows from operating activities sufficient to
enable Kronos to pay its debts when they become due and to fund its other
liquidity needs. As a result, Kronos may need to refinance all or a
portion of its debt before maturity. Kronos may not be able to
refinance any of its debt in a timely manner on favorable terms, if at
all. Any inability to generate sufficient cash flows or to refinance
Kronos’ debt on favorable terms could have a material adverse effect on our
financial condition.
Negative
worldwide economic conditions could continue to result in a decrease in our
sales and an increase in our operating costs, which could continue to adversely
affect our business and operating results.
If the
current worldwide economic downturn continues, many of CompX’s direct and
indirect customers may continue to delay or reduce their purchases of the
components we manufacture or of the products that utilize our
components. In addition, many of CompX’s customers rely on credit
financing for their working capital needs. If the negative conditions
in the global credit markets continue to prevent CompX’s customers' access to
credit, product orders may continue to decrease which could result in lower
sales. Likewise, if suppliers continue to face challenges in
obtaining credit, in selling their products or otherwise in operating their
businesses, they may become unable to continue to offer the materials CompX uses
to manufacture our products. These actions could continue to result
in reductions in our sales, increased price competition and increased operating
costs, which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and
financial condition.
Negative
global economic conditions increase the risk that we could suffer unrecoverable
losses on our customers' accounts receivable which would adversely affect our
financial results.
CompX and
Kronos extend credit and payment terms to some customers. Although we have an
ongoing process of evaluating customers' financial conditions, we could suffer
significant losses if a customer fails and is unable to pay. A
significant loss of an account receivable would have a negative impact on our
financial results.
ITEM
1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM
2. PROPERTIES
Our
principal executive offices are located in an office building located at 5430
LBJ Freeway, Dallas, Texas, 75240-2697. The principal properties used
in the operations of our subsidiaries and affiliates, including certain risks
and uncertainties related thereto, are described in the applicable business
sections of Item 1 – “Business.” We believe that our facilities are
generally adequate and suitable for our respective uses.
ITEM 3.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
We are involved in various legal
proceedings. In addition to information that is included below, we
have included certain of the information called for by this Item in Note 19
to our Consolidated Financial Statements, and we are incorporating that
information here by reference.
Lead
pigment litigation
Our
former operations included the manufacture of lead pigments for use in paint and
lead-based paint. We, other former manufacturers of lead pigments for
use in paint and lead-based paint (together, the “former pigment manufacturers”)
and the Lead Industries Association (“LIA”), which discontinued business
operations in 2002, have been named as defendants in various legal proceedings
seeking damages for personal injury, property damage and governmental
expenditures allegedly caused by the use of lead-based
paints. Certain of these actions have been filed by or on behalf of
states, counties, cities or their public housing authorities and school
districts, and certain others have been asserted as class
actions. These lawsuits seek recovery under a variety of theories,
including public and private nuisance, negligent product design, negligent
failure to warn, strict liability, breach of warranty, conspiracy/concert of
action, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, market share or risk
contribution liability, intentional tort, fraud and misrepresentation,
violations of state consumer protection statutes, supplier negligence and
similar claims.
The
plaintiffs in these actions generally seek to impose on the defendants
responsibility for lead paint abatement and health concerns associated with the
use of lead-based paints, including damages for personal injury, contribution
and/or indemnification for medical expenses, medical monitoring expenses and
costs for educational programs. To the extent the plaintiffs seek
compensatory or punitive damages in these actions, such damages are unspecified
unless otherwise indicated below. In some cases, the damages are
unspecified pursuant to the requirements of applicable state
law. A number of cases are inactive or have been dismissed or
withdrawn. Most of the remaining cases are in various pre-trial
stages. Some are on appeal following dismissal or summary judgment
rulings in favor of either the defendants or the plaintiffs. In
addition, various other cases are pending (in which we are not a defendant)
seeking recovery for injury allegedly caused by lead pigment and lead-based
paint. Although we are not a defendant in these cases, the outcome of
these cases may have an impact on cases that might be filed against us in the
future.
We believe that these actions are
without merit, and we intend to continue to deny all allegations of wrongdoing
and liability and to defend against all actions vigorously. We have
never settled any of these cases, nor have any final, non-appealable, adverse
judgments against us been entered.
We have
not accrued any amounts for any of the pending lead pigment and lead-based paint
litigation cases. Liability that may result, if any, cannot be
reasonably estimated. In addition, new cases may continue to be filed
against us. We cannot assure you that we will not incur liability in
the future in respect of any of the pending or possible litigation in view of
the inherent uncertainties involved in court and jury rulings. The
resolution of any of these cases could result in recognition of a loss
contingency accrual that could have a material adverse impact on our net income
for the interim or annual period during which such liability is recognized, and
a material adverse impact on our consolidated financial condition and
liquidity.
In September 1999, an amended complaint
was filed in Thomas v. Lead
Industries Association, et al. (Circuit Court, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, Case
No. 99-CV-6411) adding as defendants the former pigment manufacturers to a suit
originally filed against plaintiff's landlords. Plaintiff, a minor,
alleged injuries purportedly caused by lead on the surfaces of premises in homes
in which he resided and sought compensatory and punitive damages. The
case was tried in October 2007, and in November 2007 the jury returned a verdict
in favor of all defendants. In April 2008, plaintiff filed an appeal,
and in February 2009, the appeal was stayed after the appellate court received
notice that one of the defendants, Millennium Chemicals, Inc., had filed for
bankruptcy.
In April
2000, we were served with a complaint in County of Santa Clara v. Atlantic
Richfield Company, et al. (Superior Court of the State of California,
County of Santa Clara, Case No. CV788657) brought against the former pigment
manufacturers, the LIA and certain paint manufacturers. The County of
Santa Clara seeks to recover compensatory damages for funds the plaintiffs have
expended or will in the future expend for medical treatment, educational
expenses, abatement or other costs due to exposure to, or potential exposure to,
lead paint, disgorgement of profit, and punitive damages. Solano,
Alameda, San Francisco, Monterey and San Mateo counties, the cities of San
Francisco, Oakland, Los Angeles and San Diego, the Oakland and San Francisco
unified school districts and housing authorities and the Oakland Redevelopment
Agency have joined the case as plaintiffs. In January 2007,
plaintiffs amended the complaint to drop all of the claims except for the public
nuisance claim. In April 2007, the trial court ruled that the
contingency fee arrangement between plaintiffs and their counsel was
illegal. In May 2007, plaintiffs appealed the ruling and all
proceedings in the trial court were stayed pending review by the appellate
court. The appellate court reversed the trial court’s ruling, thereby
allowing contingent fee arrangements in the case. In May 2008, the
defendants filed a petition for review by the California Supreme Court, which
was granted in July 2008.
In June 2000, a complaint was filed in
Illinois state court, Lewis,
et al. v. Lead Industries Association, et al. (Circuit Court of Cook
County, Illinois, County Department, Chancery Division, Case
No. 00CH09800). Plaintiffs seek to represent two classes, one
consisting of minors between the ages of six months and six years who resided in
housing in Illinois built before 1978, and another consisting of individuals
between the ages of six and twenty years who lived in Illinois housing built
before 1978 when they were between the ages of six months and six years and who
had blood lead levels of 10 micrograms/deciliter or more. The
complaint seeks damages jointly and severally from the former pigment
manufacturers and the LIA to establish a medical screening fund for the first
class to determine blood lead levels, a medical monitoring fund for the second
class to detect the onset of latent diseases, and a fund for a public education
campaign. In April 2008, the trial court judge certified a class
of children whose blood lead levels were screened venously between August
1995 and February 2008 and who had incurred expenses associated with such
screening. Certain defendants filed a motion to decertify the class
in January 2009. The case is proceeding in the trial
court.
In May 2001, we were served with
a complaint in City of
Milwaukee v. NL Industries, Inc. and Mautz Paint (Circuit Court, Civil
Division, Milwaukee County, Wisconsin, Case No.
01CV003066). Plaintiff sought compensatory and equitable relief for
lead hazards in Milwaukee homes, restitution for amounts it has spent to abate
lead and punitive damages. The case was tried in May and June 2007,
and in June 2007, the jury returned a verdict in favor of NL. In
December 2007, plaintiff filed a notice of appeal, and in November 2008, the
appellate court affirmed the verdict. In December 2008, the plaintiff
petitioned the Wisconsin Supreme Court for review.
In
November 2003, we were served with a complaint in Lauren Brown v. NL Industries, Inc.,
et al. (Circuit Court of Cook County, Illinois, County Department, Law
Division, Case No. 03L 012425). The complaint seeks damages against
us and two local property owners on behalf of a minor for injuries alleged to be
due to exposure to lead paint contained in the minor’s residence. We
have denied all allegations of liability. In January 2009, NL filed a
motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of the case. The case
is proceeding in the trial court.
In January 2006, we were served with a
complaint in Hess, et al. v.
NL Industries, Inc., et al. (Missouri Circuit Court 22nd
Judicial Circuit, St. Louis City, Cause No. 052-11799). Plaintiffs
are two minor children who allege injuries purportedly caused by lead on the
surfaces of the home in which they resided. Plaintiffs seek
compensatory and punitive damages. We have denied all allegations of
liability. The case is proceeding in the trial court.
In
January and February 2007, we were served with several complaints, the majority
of which were filed in Circuit Court in Milwaukee County,
Wisconsin. In some cases, complaints have been filed elsewhere in
Wisconsin. The plaintiffs are minor children who allege injuries
purportedly caused by lead on the surfaces of the homes in which they
reside. Plaintiffs seek compensatory and punitive
damages. The defendants in these cases include us, American Cyanamid
Company, Armstrong Containers, Inc., E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Company,
Millennium Holdings, LLC, Atlanta Richfield Company, The Sherwin-Williams
Company, Conagra Foods, Inc. and the Wisconsin Department of Health and Family
Services. In some cases, additional lead paint manufacturers and/or
property owners are also defendants. Of the cases filed, five remain
pending, four of the remaining cases have been removed to Federal court and all
of the cases have been stayed. We have denied all liability in these
cases.
In May
2007, we were served with a complaint in State of Ohio, ex rel. Marc Dann
Attorney General v. Sherwin-Williams Company et al (U.S. District Court,
Southern District of Ohio, Eastern Division, Case No.
2:08-cv-079). NL filed a motion to dismiss the claims in October
2008. In February 2009, the state voluntarily dismissed its
complaint.
In
October 2007, we were served with a complaint in Jones v. Joaquin Coe et al.
(Superior Court of New Jersey, Essex County, Case No.
ESX-L-9900-06). Plaintiff seeks compensatory and punitive damages for
injuries purportedly caused by lead paint on the surfaces of the apartments in
which he resided as a minor. Other defendants include three former
owners of the apartment building at issue in this case. We have
denied all liability. In October 2008, the complaint was amended to
add as defendants, former owners of other residences in which the plaintiff
lived. The case is proceeding in the trial court.
In
addition to the foregoing litigation, various legislation and administrative
regulations have, from time to time, been proposed that seek to (a) impose
various obligations on present and former manufacturers of lead pigment and
lead-based paint with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the
use of such products and (b) effectively overturn court decisions in which we
and other pigment manufacturers have been successful. Examples of
such proposed legislation include bills which would permit civil liability for
damages on the basis of market share, rather than requiring plaintiffs to prove
that the defendant’s product caused the alleged damage, and bills which would
revive actions barred by the statute of limitations. While no
legislation or regulations have been enacted to date that are expected to have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of
operations or liquidity, the imposition of market share liability or other
legislation could have such an effect.
Environmental
matters and litigation
Our
operations are governed by various environmental laws and
regulations. Certain of our businesses are and have been engaged in
the handling, manufacture or use of substances or compounds that may be
considered toxic or hazardous within the meaning of applicable environmental
laws and regulations. As with other companies engaged in similar
businesses, certain of our past and current operations and products have the
potential to cause environmental or other damage. We have implemented
and continue to implement various policies and programs in an effort to minimize
these risks. Our policy is to maintain compliance with applicable
environmental laws and regulations at all of our plants and to strive to improve
environmental performance. From time to time, we may be subject to
environmental regulatory enforcement under U.S. and foreign statutes, the
resolution of which typically involves the establishment of compliance
programs. It is possible that future developments, such as stricter
requirements of environmental laws and enforcement policies, could adversely
affect our production, handling, use, storage, transportation, sale or disposal
of such substances. We believe that all of our facilities are in
substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws.
Certain
properties and facilities used in our former operations, including divested
primary and secondary lead smelters and former mining locations, are the subject
of civil litigation, administrative proceedings or investigations arising under
federal and state environmental laws. Additionally, in connection
with past operating practices, we are currently involved as a defendant,
potentially responsible party (“PRP”) or both, pursuant to the CERCLA, and
similar state laws in various governmental and private actions associated with
waste disposal sites, mining locations, and facilities we or our predecessors
currently or previously owned, operated or were used by us or our subsidiaries,
or their predecessors, certain of which are on the United States Environmental
Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) Superfund National Priorities List or similar state
lists. These proceedings seek cleanup costs, damages for personal
injury or property damage and/or damages for injury to natural
resources. Certain of these proceedings involve claims for
substantial amounts. Although we may be jointly and severally liable
for these costs, in most cases we are only one of a number of PRPs who may also
be jointly and severally liable. In addition, we are a party to a
number of personal injury lawsuits filed in various jurisdictions alleging
claims related to environmental conditions alleged to have resulted from our
operations.
Environmental
obligations are difficult to assess and estimate for numerous reasons including
the:
·
|
complexity
and differing interpretations of governmental
regulations;
|
·
|
number
of PRPs and their ability or willingness to fund such allocation of
costs;
|
·
|
financial
capabilities of the PRPs and the allocation of costs among
them;
|
·
|
solvency
of other PRPs;
|
·
|
multiplicity
of possible solutions; and
|
·
|
number
of years of investigatory, remedial and monitoring activity
required.
|
In
addition, the imposition of more stringent standards or requirements under
environmental laws or regulations, new developments or changes regarding site
cleanup costs or allocation of costs among PRPs, solvency of other PRPs, the
results of future testing and analysis undertaken with respect to certain sites
or a determination that we are potentially responsible for the release of
hazardous substances at other sites, could cause our expenditures to exceed our
current estimates. Because we may be jointly and severally liable for
the total remediation cost at certain sites, the amount for which we are
ultimately liable may exceed our accruals due to, among other things, the
reallocation of costs among PRPs or the insolvency of one or more
PRPs. We cannot assure you that actual costs will not exceed accrued
amounts or the upper end of the range for sites for which estimates have been
made, and we cannot assure you that costs will not be incurred for sites where
no estimates presently can be made. Further, additional environmental
matters may arise in the future. If we were to incur any future
liability, this could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
financial statements, results of operations and liquidity.
We record
liabilities related to environmental remediation obligations when estimated
future expenditures are probable and reasonably estimable. We adjust
our environmental accruals as further information becomes available to us or as
circumstances change. We generally do not discount estimated future
expenditures to their present value due to the uncertainty of the timing of the
pay out. We recognize recoveries of remediation costs from other
parties, if any, as assets when their receipt is deemed probable. At
December 31, 2008, we have not recognized any receivables for
recoveries.
We do not
know and cannot estimate the exact time frame over which we will make payments
for our accrued environmental costs. The timing of payments depends
upon a number of factors including the timing of the actual remediation process;
which in turn depends on factors outside of our control. At each
balance sheet date, we estimate the amount of our accrued environmental costs
which we expect to pay within the next twelve months, and we classify this
estimate as a current liability. We classify the remaining accrued
environmental costs as a noncurrent liability.
On a
quarterly basis, we evaluate the potential range of our liability at sites where
we have been named as a PRP or defendant, including sites for which our
wholly-owned environmental management subsidiary, NL Environmental Management
Services, Inc. (“EMS”) has contractually assumed our obligations. See
Note 19 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. At December 31,
2008, we had accrued approximately $50 million for those environmental matters
which we believe are reasonably estimable. We believe that it is not
possible to estimate the range of costs for certain sites. The upper
end of the range of reasonably possible costs to us for sites for which we
believe it is possible to estimate costs is approximately $76 million, including
the amount currently accrued. We have not discounted these estimates
to present value.
At
December 31, 2008, there are approximately 20 sites for which we are not
currently able to estimate a range of costs. For these sites,
generally the investigation is in the early stages, and we are unable to
determine whether or not we actually had any association with the site, the
nature of our responsibility, if any, for the contamination at the site and the
extent of contamination at the site. The timing and availability of
information on these sites is dependent on events outside of our control, such
as when the party alleging liability provides information to us. At
certain of these previously inactive sites, we have received general and special
notices of liability from the EPA alleging that we, along with other PRPs, are
liable for past and future costs of remediating environmental contamination
allegedly caused by former operations conducted at the sites. These
notifications may assert that we, along with other PRPs, are liable for past
clean-up costs that could be material to us if we are ultimately found
liable.
In
December 2003, we were served with a complaint in The Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma et al.
v. ASARCO Incorporated et al. (United States District Court, Northern
District of Oklahoma, Case No. 03-CII-846H(J)). The complaint alleges
public nuisance, private nuisance, trespass, strict liability, deceit by false
representation and was subsequently amended to assert claims under CERCLA
against us, six other mining companies and the United States of America with
respect to former operations in the Tar Creek mining district in
Oklahoma. Among other things, the complaint seeks actual and punitive
damages from defendants. We have moved to dismiss the complaint,
asserted certain counterclaims and have denied all of plaintiffs’
allegations. In February 2006, the court of appeals affirmed the
trial court’s ruling that plaintiffs waived their sovereign immunity to
defendants’ counter claim for contribution and indemnity. In December
2007, the court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Tribe’s medical
monitoring claims. In July 2008, the court granted the defendants’
motion to dismiss the Tribe’s CERCLA natural resources damages
claim. In January 2009, the defendants filed a motion for partial
summary judgment, seeking dismissal of certain plaintiffs’ claims for lack of
standing.
In
February 2004, we were served in Evans v. ASARCO (United
States District Court, Northern District of Oklahoma, Case No. 04-CV-94EA(M)), a
purported class action on behalf of two classes of persons living in the town of
Quapaw, Oklahoma: (1) a medical monitoring class of persons who have lived in
the area since 1994, and (2) a property owner class of residential, commercial
and government property owners. Four individuals are named as
plaintiffs, together with the mayor of the town of Quapaw, Oklahoma, and the
School Board of Quapaw, Oklahoma. Plaintiffs allege causes of action
in nuisance and seek a medical monitoring program, a relocation program,
property damages and punitive damages. We answered the complaint and
denied all of plaintiffs’ allegations. The trial court subsequently
stayed all proceedings in this case pending the outcome of a class certification
decision in another case that had been pending in the same U.S. District Court,
a case from which we have been dismissed with prejudice.
In
January 2006, we were served in Brown et al. v. NL Industries, Inc.
et al. (Circuit Court Wayne County, Michigan, Case No. 06-602096
CZ). Plaintiffs, property owners and other past or present residents
of the Krainz Woods Neighborhood of Wayne County, Michigan, allege causes of
action in negligence, nuisance, trespass and under the Michigan Natural
Resources and Environmental Protection Act with respect to a lead smelting
facility formerly operated by us and another defendant. Plaintiffs
seek property damages, personal injury damages, loss of income and medical
expense and medical monitoring costs. In October 2007, we moved to
dismiss several plaintiffs who failed to respond to discovery requests, and in
February 2008, the motion was granted with respect to all such
plaintiffs. In February 2008, the trial court entered a case
management order pursuant to which the case will proceed as to eight of the
plaintiffs’ claims, and the claims of the remaining plaintiffs have been stayed
in the meantime. In April 2008, the other defendant in the case
agreed to a settlement with the plaintiffs, and we are the only remaining
defendant. The case is proceeding in the trial court.
In June
2008, we were served in Barton, et al. v. NL Industries,
Inc., (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Case No.:
2:08-CV-12558). In January 2009, we were served in Brown, et al. v. NL Industries, Inc.
et al. (Circuit Court Wayne County, Michigan, Case No. 09-002458
CE). The plaintiffs in both of these cases are additional property owners
and other past or present residents of the Krainz Woods Neighborhood, and the
claims raised in these cases are identical to those in the Brown case described
above. We intend to deny liability in both subsequent cases and will
defend vigorously against all claims.
In June
2006, we and several other PRPs received a Unilateral Administrative Order
(“UAO”) from the EPA regarding a formerly-owned mine and milling facility
located in Park Hills, Missouri. The Doe Run Company is the current
owner of the site, which was purchased by a predecessor of Doe Run from us in
approximately 1936. Doe Run is also named in the Order. In
April 2008, the parties signed a definitive cost sharing agreement for sharing
of the costs anticipated in connection with the order. In May 2008,
the parties began work at the site as required by the UAO and in accordance with
the cost sharing agreement.
In
October 2006, we entered into a consent decree in the United States District
Court for the District of Kansas, in which we agreed to perform remedial design
and remedial actions in Operating Unit 6 of the Waco Subsite of the Cherokee
County Superfund Site. We conducted milling activities on the portion
of the site which we have agreed to remediate. We are also sharing
responsibility with other PRPs as well as the EPA for remediating a tributary
that drains the portions of the site in which the PRPs operated. We
will also reimburse the EPA for a portion of its past and future response costs
related to the site.
In June 2008, we received a Directive
and Notice to Insurers from the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection (“NJDEP”) regarding the Margaret’s Creek site in Old Bridge Township,
New Jersey. NJDEP alleged that a waste hauler transported waste from
one of our former facilities for disposal at the site in the early
1970s. We are involved in an ongoing dialogue with the NJDEP
regarding the scope of the remedial activities that may be necessary at the site
and the identification of other parties who may have liability for the
site.
In September 2008, we received a
Special Notice letter from the EPA for liability associated with the Tar Creek
site and a demand for related past and relocation costs. We responded
with a good-faith offer to pay certain of the past costs and to complete limited
work in the areas in which it operated, but declined to pay for other past costs
and declined to pay for any relocation costs. We are involved in an
ongoing dialogue with the EPA regarding a potential settlement with the
EPA.
Other
litigation
In
addition to the matters described above, we and our affiliates are also involved
in various other environmental, contractual, product liability, patent (or
intellectual property), employment and other claims and disputes incidental to
present and former businesses. In certain cases, we have insurance
coverage for these items, although we do not expect additional material
insurance coverage for environmental claims.
We
currently believe that the disposition of all claims and disputes, individually
or in the aggregate, should not have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity beyond the
accruals already provided.
Insurance
coverage claims
We are
involved in certain legal proceedings with a number of our former insurance
carriers regarding the nature and extent of the carriers’ obligations to us
under insurance policies with respect to certain lead pigment and asbestos
lawsuits. In addition to information that is included below, we have
included certain of the information called for by this Item in Note 19 to our
Consolidated Financial Statements, and we are incorporating that information
here by reference.
The issue
of whether insurance coverage for defense costs or indemnity or both will be
found to exist for our lead pigment and asbestos litigation depends upon a
variety of factors, and we cannot assure you that such insurance coverage will
be available. We have not considered any potential insurance recoveries
for lead pigment or asbestos litigation matters in determining related
accruals.
We have agreements with two former
insurance carriers pursuant to which the carriers reimburse us for a portion of
our lead pigment litigation defense costs, and one carrier reimburses us for a
portion of our asbestos litigation defense costs. We are not able to
determine how much we will ultimately recover from these carriers for defense
costs incurred by us, because of certain issues that arise regarding which
defense costs qualify for reimbursement. While we continue to seek
additional insurance recoveries, we do not know if we will be successful in
obtaining reimbursement for either defense costs or indemnity. We have not
considered any additional potential insurance recoveries in determining accruals
for lead pigment or asbestos litigation matters. Any additional insurance
recoveries would be recognized when the receipt is probable and the amount is
determinable.
We have
settled insurance coverage claims concerning environmental claims with certain
of our principal former carriers. We do not expect further material
settlements relating to environmental remediation coverage.
ITEM 4. SUBMISSION
OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS
No matters were submitted to a vote of
security holders during the quarter ended December 31, 2008.
PART
II
ITEM 5. MARKET
FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
Our
common stock is listed and traded on the New York Stock Exchange (symbol:
NL). As of February 28, 2009, there were approximately 3,480 holders
of record of our common stock. The following table sets forth the
high and low closing per share sales prices for our common stock for the periods
indicated, according to Bloomberg, and cash dividends paid during such
periods. On February 27, 2009 the closing price of our common stock
was $9.27.
|
|
High
|
|
|
Low
|
|
|
Cash
dividends
paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
12.09 |
|
|
$ |
10.02 |
|
|
$ |
.125 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
13.52 |
|
|
|
10.02 |
|
|
|
.125 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
13.05 |
|
|
|
9.49 |
|
|
|
.125 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
12.33 |
|
|
|
9.34 |
|
|
|
.125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year
ended December 31, 2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First
Quarter
|
|
$ |
11.63 |
|
|
$ |
8.65 |
|
|
$ |
.125 |
|
Second
Quarter
|
|
|
11.89 |
|
|
|
9.53 |
|
|
|
.125 |
|
Third
Quarter
|
|
|
10.93 |
|
|
|
9.37 |
|
|
|
.125 |
|
Fourth
Quarter
|
|
|
13.96 |
|
|
|
8.09 |
|
|
|
.125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
January
1, 2009 through February 27, 2009
|
|
$ |
14.35 |
|
|
$ |
9.21 |
|
|
$ |
.125 |
|
__________________________
In
February 2009, our Board of Directors declared a first quarter 2009 cash
dividend of $.125 per share to shareholders of record as of March 10, 2009 to be
paid on March 26, 2009. However, the declaration and payment of
future dividends, and the amount thereof, is discretionary and is dependent upon
our results of operations, financial condition, cash requirements for
businesses, contractual restrictions and other factors deemed relevant by our
Board of Directors. The amount and timing of past dividends is not
necessarily indicative of the amount or timing of any future dividends which
might be paid. There are currently no contractual restrictions on the
amount of dividends which we may pay.
Performance
Graph - Set forth below is a
line graph comparing the yearly change in our cumulative total stockholder
return on our common stock against the cumulative total return of the S&P
500 Composite Stock Price Index and the S&P 500 Industrial Conglomerates
Index for the period from December 31, 2003 through December 31,
2008. The graph shows the value at December 31 of each year assuming
an original investment of $100 at December 31, 2003 and the reinvestment of
dividends.
|
|
2003
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
NL
common stock
|
|
$ |
100 |
|
|
$ |
213 |
|
|
$ |
144 |
|
|
$ |
111 |
|
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
$ |
157 |
|
S&P
500 Composite Stock Price Index
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
S&P
500 Industrial Conglomerates Index
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The
information contained in the performance graph shall not be deemed “soliciting
material” or “filed” with the SEC, or subject to the liabilities of Section 18
of the Securities Exchange Act, except to the extent we specifically request
that the material be treated as soliciting material or specifically incorporate
this performance graph by reference into a document filed under the Securities
Act or the Securities Exchange Act.
Equity
compensation plan information
We have
an equity compensation plan, which was approved by our shareholders, providing
for the discretionary grant to our employees and directors of, among other
things, options to purchase our common stock and stock awards. As of
December 31, 2008, there were 95,050 options outstanding to purchase shares of
our common stock, and approximately 4,086,000 shares were available for future
grant or issuance. We do not have any equity compensation plans that
were not approved by our shareholders. See Note 13 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
|
ITEM
6. SELECTED FINANCIAL
DATA
|
The
following selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our
Consolidated Financial Statements and Item 7 - "Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations."
|
|
Years ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In
millions, except per share data)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS DATA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Component
products
|
|
$ |
182.6 |
|
|
$ |
186.4 |
|
|
$ |
190.1 |
|
|
$ |
177.7 |
|
|
$ |
165.5 |
|
Chemicals
(1)
|
|
|
559.1 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
741.7 |
|
|
$ |
186.4 |
|
|
$ |
190.1 |
|
|
$ |
177.7 |
|
|
$ |
165.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Component
products
|
|
$ |
16.2 |
|
|
$ |
19.3 |
|
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
|
$ |
15.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.3 |
|
Chemicals
(1)
|
|
|
66.7 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
82.9 |
|
|
$ |
19.3 |
|
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
|
$ |
15.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
in earnings(losses) of Kronos (1)
|
|
$ |
9.1 |
|
|
$ |
25.7 |
|
|
$ |
29.3 |
|
|
$ |
(23.9 |
) |
|
$ |
3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
159.1 |
|
|
$ |
33.3 |
|
|
$ |
26.1 |
|
|
$ |
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
33.2 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
(.3 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
162.6 |
|
|
$ |
33.0 |
|
|
$ |
26.1 |
|
|
$ |
(1.7 |
) |
|
$ |
33.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DILUTED
EARNINGS PER SHARE DATA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$ |
3.29 |
|
|
$ |
.68 |
|
|
$ |
.54 |
|
|
$ |
(.04 |
) |
|
$ |
.68 |
|
Discontinued
operations
|
|
|
.07 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
3.36 |
|
|
$ |
.68 |
|
|
$ |
.54 |
|
|
$ |
(.04 |
) |
|
$ |
.68 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends
per share (2)
|
|
$ |
.80 |
|
|
$ |
1.00 |
|
|
$ |
.50 |
|
|
$ |
.50 |
|
|
$ |
.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
average common shares outstanding
|
|
|
48,419 |
|
|
|
48,587 |
|
|
|
48,584 |
|
|
|
48,590 |
|
|
|
48,605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BALANCE
SHEET DATA (at year end):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
assets
|
|
$ |
552.5 |
|
|
$ |
485.6 |
|
|
$ |
529.3 |
|
|
$ |
524.8 |
|
|
$ |
419.5 |
|
Long-term debt, including current maturities (3)
|
|
|
.1 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
50.0 |
|
|
|
43.0 |
|
Stockholders'
equity
|
|
|
234.2 |
|
|
|
220.3 |
|
|
|
248.5 |
|
|
|
246.5 |
|
|
|
188.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STATEMENT
OF CASH FLOW DATA:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
cash provided by(used in):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
activities
|
|
$ |
92.7 |
|
|
$ |
(5.3 |
) |
|
$ |
29.0 |
|
|
$ |
(2.8 |
) |
|
$ |
.8 |
|
Investing
activities
|
|
|
34.5 |
|
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
(25.2 |
) |
|
|
17.5 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
Financing
activities
|
|
|
(28.7 |
) |
|
|
(35.8 |
) |
|
|
(27.7 |
) |
|
|
(27.3 |
) |
|
|
(32.2 |
) |
(1)
|
We
ceased to consolidate the Kronos chemicals segment effective July 1, 2004,
at which time we commenced to account for our interest in Kronos by the
equity method.
|
(2)
|
Amounts
paid in 2005 (last three quarters), 2006, 2007 and 2008 were cash
dividends, while amounts paid in 2004 and the first quarter of 2005 were
in the form of shares of Kronos common
stock.
|
(3)
|
Long-term
debt in 2007 and 2008 represents a promissory note payable to an
affiliate. See Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
|
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT'S
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF
OPERATIONS
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Business
Overview
We are primarily a holding
company. We operate in the component products industry through our
majority-owned subsidiary, CompX International Inc. We also own a
non-controlling interest in Kronos Worldwide, Inc. Both CompX (NYSE:
CIX) and Kronos (NYSE: KRO) file periodic reports with the SEC.
CompX is a leading manufacturer of
security products, precision ball bearing slides and ergonomic computer support
systems used in the office furniture, transportation, postal, tool storage,
appliance and a variety of other industries. CompX is also a leading
manufacturer of stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges and throttle controls
for the performance marine industry.
We account for our 36% non-controlling
interest in Kronos by the equity method. Kronos is a leading global
producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide
pigments. TiO2 is used
for a variety of manufacturing applications including plastics, paints, paper
and other industrial products.
Net
Income Overview
We had
net income of $33.2 million, or $.68 per diluted share, in 2008 compared to
a net loss of $1.7 million, or $.04 per diluted share, in 2007 and net
income of $26.1 million, or $.54 per diluted share, in 2006.
The
increase in our diluted earnings per share from 2007 to 2008 is due primarily to
the net effects of:
·
|
a
litigation settlement pre-tax gain of $48.8 million in
2008;
|
·
|
a
goodwill impairment charge of $10.1 million in
2008;
|
·
|
higher
equity in earnings from Kronos in
2008;
|
·
|
lower
litigation and related expenses in
2008;
|
·
|
higher
environmental costs in 2008; and
|
·
|
higher
insurance recoveries in 2008.
|
The
decrease in our diluted earnings per share from 2006 to 2007 is due primarily to
the net effects of:
·
|
lower
equity in earnings from Kronos in
2007;
|
·
|
lower
insurance recoveries in 2007;
|
·
|
higher
legal defense costs in 2007;
|
·
|
higher
securities transaction gains in 2007;
and
|
·
|
lower
component products income from operations in
2007.
|
Our net
income in 2008 includes:
·
|
a
litigation settlement gain of $.65 per diluted share related to the
settlement of condemnation proceedings on real property we
owned;
|
·
|
a
goodwill impairment charge of $.21 per diluted share related to the marine
business line of our component products
operations;
|
·
|
interest
income of $.06 per diluted share related to certain escrow
funds;
|
·
|
income
included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.03 per diluted share
related to an adjustment of certain income tax attributes of Kronos in
Germany; and
|
·
|
income
of $.13 per diluted share related to certain insurance
recoveries.
|
Our net
loss in 2007 includes:
·
|
a
charge included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.43 per diluted
share related to a reduction in Kronos’ net deferred income tax asset
resulting from a change in German income tax rates as discussed
below;
|
·
|
a
charge included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.04 per diluted
share related to an adjustment of certain income tax attributes of Kronos
in Germany;
|
·
|
income
of $.30 per diluted share from a gain on sale of TIMET common
stock;
|
·
|
income
of $.08 per diluted share related to certain insurance recoveries we
received; and
|
·
|
income
of $.03 per diluted share due to a net reduction in our reserve for
uncertain tax positions.
|
Our net
income in 2006 includes:
·
|
a
charge included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.07 per diluted
share related to Kronos’ redemption of its 8.875% Senior Secured
Notes;
|
·
|
income
included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.16 per diluted share
related to Kronos’ aggregate income tax benefit associated with the net
effects of the withdrawal of certain income tax assessments previously
made by the Belgian and Norwegian tax authorities, the resolution of
certain income tax issues related to German and Belgian operations and the
enactment of a reduction in the Canadian federal income tax rate;
and
|
·
|
income
of $.10 per diluted share related to certain insurance recoveries we
received.
|
Outlook
for 2009
We
currently expect our net income in 2009 to be significantly lower than 2008 due
to the net effects of:
·
|
lower
income from operations in 2009 as a result of higher legal defense
costs;
|
·
|
lower
equity in earnings from Kronos in 2009;
and
|
·
|
lower
litigation settlement gains in
2009.
|
Critical
accounting policies and estimates
The
accompanying "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations" is based upon our Consolidated Financial Statements,
which have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America ("GAAP"). The preparation of
these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of
contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and
the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reported
period. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including
those related to the recoverability of long-lived assets, pension and other
postretirement benefit obligations and the underlying actuarial assumptions
related thereto, the realization of deferred income tax assets and accruals for
litigation, income tax and other contingencies. We base our estimates
on historical experience and on various other assumptions we believe to be
reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for
making judgments about the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and
expenses. Actual results may differ significantly from
previously-estimated amounts under different assumptions or
conditions.
The
following critical accounting policies affect our more significant judgments and
estimates used in the preparation of our Consolidated Financial
Statements:
·
|
Investments - We own
investments in certain companies that we account for as marketable
securities carried at fair value (Level 1 inputs) or that we account for
under the equity method. For all such investments, we record an
impairment charge when we believe that an investment has experienced a
decline in fair value below its cost basis (for marketable securities) or
below its carrying value (for equity method investees) that is other than
temporary. Future adverse changes in market conditions or poor
operating results of underlying investments could result in losses or an
inability to recover the carrying value of the investments that may not be
reflected in an investment's current carrying value, thereby possibly
requiring an impairment charge in the
future.
|
At
December 31, 2008, the carrying value (which equals fair value) of substantially
all of our marketable securities equaled or exceeded the cost basis of each of
such investments. With respect to our investment in Valhi, the $51.2
million carrying value exceeded its $24.3 million cost basis by about 111%, and
the $12.8 million carrying value of our investment in TIMET exceeded its $11.4
million cost basis by about 12%. At December 31, 2008, the $11.65 per
share quoted market price of our investment in Kronos (our only equity method
investee) exceeded its per share net carrying value by about 79%.
·
|
Long-lived
assets. We recognize an impairment charge associated
with our long-lived assets, including property and equipment, whenever we
determine that recovery of such long-lived asset is not
probable. Such determination is made in accordance with the
applicable GAAP requirements of SFAS No. 144, Accounting for the Impairment
or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, and is based upon, among other
things, estimates of the amount of future net cash flows to be generated
by the long-lived asset (Level 3 inputs) and estimates of the current fair
value of the asset. Significant judgment is required in
estimating such cash flows. Assumptions used in our impairment
evaluations, such as forecasted growth rates and our cost of capital, are
consistent with our internal projections and operating
plans. We do not assess our property and equipment for
impairment unless certain impairment indicators specified in SFAS No. 144
are present. We did not evaluate any long-lived assets for impairment
during 2008 because no such impairment indicators were
present.
|
·
|
Goodwill - In
accordance with SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and other Intangible
Assets, we review goodwill for impairment at least on an annual
basis. We are also required to review goodwill for impairment
at other times during each year when impairment indicators, as defined,
are present. The estimated fair values of CompX’s three
reporting units are determined based on discounted cash flow projections
(Level 3 inputs). See Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. Considerable management judgment is necessary to
evaluate the impact of operating changes and to estimate future cash
flows. Assumptions used in our impairment evaluations, such as
forecasted growth rates and our cost of capital, are consistent with our
internal projections and operating
plans.
|
During
the third quarter of 2008, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $10.1
million for CompX’s marine components reporting unit, which represented all of
the goodwill we had previously recognized for this reporting unit (including a
nominal amount of goodwill inherent in our investment in CompX). We used a
discounted cash flow methodology in determining the estimated fair value of
CompX’s marine components reporting unit. The factors that led us to
conclude that goodwill associated with CompX’s marine components reporting unit
was fully impaired include the continued decline in consumer spending in the
marine market as well as the overall negative economic outlook, both of which
resulted in near-term and longer-term reduced revenue, profit and cash flow
forecasts for the marine components unit. While we continue to believe in
the long term potential of the Marine Components unit, due to the extraordinary
economic downturn in the marine industry we are not currently able to foresee
when the industry and our business will recover. In response to the
present economic conditions, we have taken steps to reduce operating costs
without inhibiting our ability to take advantage of opportunities to expand our
market share.
When we
performed this analysis in the third quarter, we also reviewed the goodwill
associated with CompX’s security products and furniture components reporting
units and concluded there was no impairment of the goodwill for those reporting
units or the other intangible assets of our Marine Components
unit. The estimated fair values were also determined based on
discounted cash flow projections. Assumptions used in these
impairment evaluations, such as forecasted growth rates and our cost of capital,
are consistent with our internal projections and operating plans. However,
different assumptions and estimates could result in materially different
findings which could result in the recognition of a material asset
impairment. Due to the continued weakening of the economy, we
re-evaluated the goodwill associated with our Furniture Components reporting
unit again in the fourth quarter of 2008 and concluded no additional impairments
were present.
If our
future results were to be significantly below our current expectations, it is
reasonably likely that we would conclude additional impairments of the goodwill
and intangible assets associated with our Furniture Components reporting unit
would be present. As of December 31, 2008 our Furniture Components
reporting unit had approximately $7.1 million of goodwill. Holding
all other assumptions constant at the re-evaluation date, a 100 to 200 basis
point increase in the discount rate would reduce the enterprise value for our
Furniture Components reporting unit, indicating potential
impairment. If we record additional impairment charges in the future,
it could cause CompX to fail to comply with one or more of the financial
covenants contained in its credit facility. See Note 12 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements. In the event CompX were to fail to
comply with one or more covenants, we would attempt to negotiate waivers of any
noncompliance; however, there can be no assurance that we would be able to
negotiate any waivers. In addition the costs or conditions associated with any
waivers could be significant. At December 31, 2008 we had no balances
outstanding under the facility and we do not anticipate needing to utilize the
facility for operations in 2009.
·
|
Benefit plans - We
maintain various defined benefit pension plans and postretirement benefits
other than pensions (“OPEB”). The amounts recognized as defined
benefit pension and OPEB expenses, and the reported amounts of prepaid and
accrued pension and OPEB costs, are actuarially determined based on
several assumptions, including discount rates, expected rates of return on
plan assets and expected health care trend rates. Variances
from these actuarially assumed rates will result in increases or
decreases, as applicable, in the recognized pension and OPEB obligations,
pension and OPEB expenses and funding requirements. These
assumptions are more fully described below under “Defined Benefit Pension
Plans” and “OPEB Plans.”
|
·
|
Income taxes - Deferred
taxes are recognized for future tax effects of temporary differences
between financial and income tax reporting in accordance with the
recognition criteria of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income
Taxes. We record a reserve for uncertain tax positions in
accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No.
48, Accounting for
Uncertain Tax Positions for tax positions where we believe that it
is more-likely-than-not our position will not prevail with the applicable
tax authorities. While
we have considered future taxable income and ongoing prudent and feasible
tax planning strategies in assessing the need for a valuation allowance,
it is possible that in the future we may change our estimate of the amount
of the deferred income tax assets that would more-likely-than-not be
realized in the future resulting in an adjustment to the deferred income
tax asset valuation allowance that would either increase or decrease, as
applicable, reported net income in the period such change in estimate was
made.
|
In
addition, we make an evaluation at the end of each reporting period as to
whether or not some or all of the undistributed earnings of our foreign
subsidiaries are permanently reinvested (as that term is defined by
GAAP). While we may have concluded in the past that some of such
undistributed earnings are permanently reinvested, facts and circumstances can
change in the future, and it is possible that a change in facts and
circumstances, such as a change in the expectation regarding the capital needs
of our foreign subsidiaries, could result in a conclusion that some or all of
such undistributed earnings are no longer permanently reinvested. In
such an event, we would be required to recognize a deferred income tax liability
in an amount equal to the estimated incremental U.S. income tax and withholding
tax liability that would be generated if all of such previously-considered
permanently reinvested undistributed earnings were distributed to us in the
U.S.
·
|
Accruals - We record
accruals for environmental, legal and other contingencies and commitments
when estimated future expenditures associated with such contingencies
become probable, and the amounts can be reasonably
estimated. However, new information may become available, or
circumstances (such as applicable laws and regulations) may change,
thereby resulting in an increase or decrease in the amount required to be
accrued for such matters (and therefore a decrease or increase in reported
net income in the period of such
change).
|
Net
income from operations of CompX and Kronos is impacted by certain of these
significant judgments and estimates, as summarized below:
·
|
Chemicals
– allowance for doubtful accounts, reserves for obsolete or unmarketable
inventories, impairment of equity method investees, long-lived assets,
defined benefit pension and OPEB plans and loss accruals,
and
|
·
|
Component
products – reserves for obsolete or unmarketable inventories, impairment
of goodwill and long-lived assets and loss
accruals.
|
In
addition, general corporate and other items are impacted by the significant
judgments and estimates for impairment of marketable securities and equity
method investments, defined benefit pension and OPEB plans, deferred income tax
asset valuation allowances and loss accruals.
Income
from operations
The
following table shows the components of our income from operations.
|
|
Year ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2006-07 |
|
|
|
2007-08 |
|
|
|
(Dollars
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CompX
|
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
|
$ |
15.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.3 |
|
|
|
(25 |
)% |
|
|
(66 |
)% |
Insurance
recoveries
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
5.6 |
|
|
|
9.6 |
|
|
|
(27 |
)% |
|
|
70 |
% |
Litigation
settlement gain
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
48.8 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
Corporate
expense and other
|
|
|
(24.3 |
) |
|
|
(31.3 |
) |
|
|
(24.9 |
) |
|
|
29 |
% |
|
|
(20 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
(loss) from operations
|
|
$ |
3.9 |
|
|
$ |
(10.3 |
) |
|
$ |
38.8 |
|
|
|
(364 |
)% |
|
|
477 |
% |
CompX
International Inc.
|
|
Year ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2006-07 |
|
|
|
2007-08 |
|
|
|
(Dollars
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
$ |
190.1 |
|
|
$ |
177.7 |
|
|
$ |
165.5 |
|
|
|
(7 |
)% |
|
|
(7 |
)% |
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
143.6 |
|
|
|
132.5 |
|
|
|
125.7 |
|
|
|
(8 |
)% |
|
|
(5 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin
|
|
|
46.5 |
|
|
|
45.2 |
|
|
|
39.8 |
|
|
|
(3 |
)% |
|
|
(12 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
costs and expenses
|
|
|
26.0 |
|
|
|
29.8 |
|
|
|
34.5 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations
|
|
$ |
20.5 |
|
|
$ |
15.4 |
|
|
$ |
5.3 |
|
|
|
(25 |
)% |
|
|
(66 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
of net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of goods sold
|
|
|
76 |
% |
|
|
75 |
% |
|
|
76 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin
|
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
25 |
% |
|
|
24 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating
costs and expenses
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
16 |
% |
|
|
21 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
Sales – Net
sales decreased in 2008 as compared to 2007 principally due to lower order rates
from many of our customers resulting from unfavorable economic conditions in
North America, offset in part by the effect of sales price increases for certain
products to mitigate the effect of higher raw material costs.
Net sales
decreased in 2007 as compared to 2006 principally due to lower sales of certain
products to the office furniture market where Asian competitors have established
selling prices at a level below which we consider would return a minimally
sufficient margin to us as well as to lower order rates from many of our
customers due to unfavorable economic conditions, offset in part by the effect
of sales price increases for certain products to mitigate the effect of higher
raw material costs.
Costs of
Goods Sold and Gross Margin – Cost of goods sold
decreased from 2007 to 2008 primarily due to decreased sales
volumes. As a percentage of sales, gross margin decreased in 2008
from the prior year. The decrease in gross margin is primarily due to
higher raw material costs, not all of which could be recovered through sales
price increases or surcharges, combined with reduced coverage of fixed
manufacturing costs from lower sales volume partially offset by lower
depreciation expense in 2008 due to a reduction in capital expenditure
requirements for shorter lived assets over the last several years in response to
lower sales.
Cost of
goods sold as a percentage of net sales decreased from 2006 to 2007, and gross
margin percentage increased from the prior year. During 2007, we
experienced the favorable effects of an improved product mix and improvements in
our operating efficiency through cost reductions partially offset by the
unfavorable effect of relative changes in foreign currency exchange rates, lower
sales to the office furniture industry due to competition from lower-priced
Asian manufacturers and lower order rates from many of our customers due to
unfavorable economic conditions.
Goodwill
Impairment – During 2008, we recorded a non-cash goodwill impairment
charge of $10.1 million for CompX’s marine components reporting
unit. See Note 8 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Income from
operations – Excluding the goodwill
impairment charge discussed above, the comparison of income from operations for
2008 compared to 2007 includes the net effects of:
·
|
a
negative impact of approximately $5.4 million relating to lower order
rates from many of our customers resulting from unfavorable economic
conditions in North America,
|
·
|
increased
raw material costs that we were not able to fully recover through sales
price increases by approximately $1 million due to the competitive nature
of the markets we serve,
|
·
|
the
one-time $2.7 million charge for facility consolidation costs incurred in
2007,
|
·
|
$1.8
million in lower depreciation expense in 2008 due to a reduction in
capital expenditures for shorter lived assets over the last several years
in response to lower sales, and
|
·
|
$1.3
million favorable effect on operating income from changes in foreign
currency exchange rates.
|
Income
from operations for 2007 decreased $5.1 million, or 25% compared to 2006 and
operating margins decreased to 9% in 2007 compared to 11% for
2006. 2007 income from operations includes the net effects
of:
·
|
a
higher portion of the sales decline in 2007 occurring among lower margin
products,
|
·
|
an
increased percentage of sales from our higher margin Marine
business,
|
·
|
the
$2.7 million charge for facility consolidation
costs,
|
·
|
a
$2.4 million unfavorable effect of relative changes in foreign currency
exchange rates (including the $1.2 million related to foreign exchange
transaction losses noted above),
|
·
|
lower
sales to the office furniture industry due to competition from lower
priced Asian manufacturers, and
|
·
|
lower
order rates from many of our customers due to unfavorable economic
conditions.
|
The $2.7
million facility consolidation costs incurred in 2007 include abnormal
manufacturing costs such as physical move costs, equipment installation,
redundant labor and recruiting fees, and fixed asset write-downs of
$765,000. Approximately $600,000 of the write-down relates to the
classification of our vacated River Grove facility as an “asset held for
sale.” See Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Currency - CompX has substantial
operations and assets located outside the United States (in Canada and
Taiwan). The majority of sales generated from CompX’s non-U.S.
operations are denominated in the U.S. dollar with the remainder denominated in
other currencies, principally the Canadian dollar and the New Taiwan
dollar. Most raw materials, labor and other production costs for our
non-U.S. operations are denominated primarily in local
currencies. Consequently, the translated U.S. dollar values of our
non-U.S. sales and operating results are subject to currency exchange rate
fluctuations which may favorably or unfavorably impact reported earnings and may
affect comparability of period-to-period operating results. Overall,
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates had the following effects on our
net sales and income from operations in 2008 as compared to 2007.
|
|
Increase
(decrease) –
Year ended December
31,
|
|
|
|
2007 vs. 2006
|
|
|
2008 vs. 2007
|
|
Impact
on:
|
|
(In
thousands)
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
$ |
886 |
|
|
$ |
406 |
|
Income
from operations
|
|
|
(2,384 |
) |
|
|
1,304 |
|
The
positive impact on sales relates to sales denominated in non-U.S. dollar
currencies translating into higher U.S. dollar sales due to a strengthening of
the local currency in relation to the U.S. dollar. The negative
impact on operating income for the 2007 versus 2006 comparison results from the
U.S. dollar denominated sales of non-U.S. operations converted into lower local
currency amounts due to the weakening of the U.S. dollar. This
negatively impacts margin as it results in less local currency generated from
sales to cover the costs of non-U.S. operations which are denominated in the
local currency. The positive impact on operating income for the 2008
versus 2007 comparison is due to lower currency exchange losses in 2008 as
compared to 2007.
General – CompX’s profitability
primarily depends on our ability to utilize production capacity effectively,
which is affected by, among other things, the demand for our products and our
ability to control our manufacturing costs, primarily comprising labor costs and
raw materials such as zinc, copper, coiled steel, stainless steel and plastic
resins. Raw material costs represent approximately 51% of our total
cost of sales. During 2006, 2007 and most of 2008, worldwide raw
material costs increased significantly. We occasionally enter into
raw material supply arrangements to mitigate the short-term impact of future
increases in raw material costs. While these arrangements do not
necessarily commit us to a minimum volume of purchases, they generally provide
for stated unit prices based upon achievement of specified volume purchase
levels. This allows us to stabilize raw material purchase prices to a
certain extent, provided the specified minimum monthly purchase quantities are
met. We enter into such arrangements for zinc, coiled steel and
plastic resins. While raw material purchase prices have recently
declined, it is uncertain whether the current prices will stabilize during
2009. Materials purchased on the spot market are sometimes subject to
unanticipated and sudden price increases. Due to the competitive
nature of the markets served by our products, it is often difficult to recover
increases in raw material costs through increased product selling prices or raw
material surcharges. Consequently, overall operating margins may be
affected by raw material cost pressures.
Outlook –
Demand for CompX’s products continues to slow, especially during the fourth
quarter of 2008, as customers react to the condition of the overall
economy. While all of CompX’s product lines are being affected, we
are experiencing a greater softness in demand in the industries we serve which
are more directly connected to lower consumer spending, as further explained
below.
·
|
Our
Security Products business is the least affected by the softness in
consumer demand, because we sell products to a diverse number of customers
across a wide range of markets, most of which are not directly impacted by
changes in consumer demand. While demand within this business
is not as significantly affected by softness in the overall economy, we do
expect sales to be lower over the next twelve
months.
|
·
|
Our
Furniture Components sales are primarily concentrated in the office
furniture, toolbox, home appliance and a number of other
industries. Several of these industries, primarily toolbox and
home appliance, are more directly affected by consumer demand than those
served by our Security Products business. We expect many of the
markets served by Furniture Components to continue to experience low
demand over the next twelve months.
|
·
|
Our
Marine business has been the most affected by the slowing economy as the
decrease in consumer confidence, the decline in home values, a tighter
credit market and volatile fuel costs have resulted in a significant
reduction in consumer spending in the marine market. We do not
expect the marine market to recover until consumer confidence returns and
home values stabilize.
|
While
changes in market demand are not within our control, we are focused on the areas
we can impact. We expect our lean manufacturing and cost improvement
initiatives to continue to positively impact our productivity and result in a
more efficient infrastructure that we can leverage when demand growth
returns. Additionally, we continue to seek opportunities to gain
market share in markets we currently serve, expand into new markets and develop
new product features in order to mitigate the impact of reduced demand as well
as broaden our sales base.
In
addition to challenges with overall demand, volatility in the cost of raw
materials is ongoing. While the cost of commodity raw materials
declined in the second half of 2008, we currently expect these costs to continue
to be volatile in 2009. If raw material prices increase, we may not
be able to fully recover the cost by passing them on to our customers through
price increases due to the competitive nature of the markets we serve and the
depressed economic conditions.
Kronos
Worldwide, Inc.
|
|
Years ended December 31,
|
|
|
% Change
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
2006-07 |
|
|
|
2007-08 |
|
|
|
(Dollars
in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
$ |
1,279.4 |
|
|
$ |
1,310.3 |
|
|
$ |
1,316.9 |
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
968.9 |
|
|
|
1,058.9 |
|
|
|
1,096.3 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross
margin
|
|
$ |
310.5 |
|
|
$ |
251.4 |
|
|
$ |
220.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations
|
|
$ |
143.2 |
|
|
$ |
84.9 |
|
|
$ |
47.2 |
|
|
|
(41 |
)% |
|
|
(44 |
)% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
general corporate, net
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss
on prepayment of debt
|
|
|
(22.3 |
) |
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest
expense
|
|
|
(43.2 |
) |
|
|
(39.4 |
) |
|
|
(42.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
before income taxes
|
|
|
81.3 |
|
|
|
48.0 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision
for income taxes (benefit)
|
|
|
(.7 |
) |
|
|
114.7 |
|
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
income (loss)
|
|
$ |
82.0 |
|
|
$ |
(66.7 |
) |
|
$ |
9.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
of net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
of sales
|
|
|
76 |
% |
|
|
81 |
% |
|
|
83 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income
from operations
|
|
|
11 |
% |
|
|
6 |
% |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity
in earnings (losses) of Kronos Worldwide, Inc.
|
|
$ |
29.3 |
|
|
$ |
(23.9 |
) |
|
$ |
3.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TiO2
operating statistics:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales
volumes*
|
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
478 |
|
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
(8 |
)% |
Production
volumes*
|
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
512 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
(1 |
)% |
|
|
- |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change
in Ti02
net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ti02
product pricing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
)% |
|
|
2 |
% |
Ti02
sales volume
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
Ti02
product mix
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Changes
in currency exchange rates
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
*
Thousands of metric tons
Net sales
– Kronos’ net sales increased 1% or $6.6 million in 2008 compared to 2007,
primarily due to favorable currency exchange rates, which we estimate increased
Kronos’ net sales for 2008 by approximately $61 million, or 5%, compared to the
same period in 2007. Variations in grades of products sold favorably
impacted net sales by 2%, along with a 2% increase in average TiO2 selling
prices. TiO2 selling
prices generally follow industry trends and prices will increase or decrease
generally as a result of competitive market pressures. During the
second and third quarters of 2008, Kronos and its competitors announced various
price increases and surcharges in response to higher operating
costs. A portion of these increase announcements were implemented
during the second, third and fourth quarters of 2008. The positive impact
of currency, product mix and pricing in 2008 were substantially offset by an 8%
decrease in sales volumes. Kronos’ sales volumes decreased 8% in 2008
primarily due to lower sales volumes in all markets as a result of a global
weakening of demand due to poor overall economic conditions.
Kronos’
net sales increased 2% or $30.9 million in 2007 compared to 2006, primarily due
to favorable currency exchange rates and a 1% increase in sales volumes offset
somewhat by a 4% decrease in average TiO2 selling
prices. We estimate the favorable effect of changes in currency exchange rates
increased Kronos’ net sales for 2007 by approximately $65 million, or 5%,
compared to 2006. Kronos’ sales volumes increased 1% in 2007
primarily due to higher sales volumes in European and export markets, which were
somewhat offset by lower sales volumes in North America. Kronos’
TiO2
sales volumes in 2007 were a new record for Kronos.
Cost of
sales – Kronos’ cost of sales increased 4% or $37.4 million in 2008
compared to 2007 due to the impact of a 22% or approximately $27 million
increase in utility costs (primarily energy costs), a 10% or approximately $35
million increase in raw material costs largely offset by currency fluctuations
(primarily the euro). The cost of sales as a percentage of net sales
increased to 83% in the year ended December 31, 2008 compared to 81% in the same
period of 2007 primarily due to the net effects of higher operating costs and
slightly higher average selling prices.
Kronos’
cost of sales increased 9% or $90 million in 2007 compared to 2006 due to higher
sales volumes, lower production volumes, and to the effects of changes in
currency exchange rates. Cost of sales as a percentage of net sales
increased to 81% in the year ended December 31, 2007, compared to 76% in the
same period of 2006 primarily due to the net effects of lower average selling
prices, lower utility costs, higher other manufacturing costs (including
maintenance) and slightly lower production volumes.
Income from
operations – Kronos’ income from
operations in 2008 declined by 44% to $47.2 million compared to 2007; income
from operations as a percentage of net sales decreased to 4% in 2008 from 6% for
2007. The decline in income from operations is driven by the decline
in gross margin, which decreased to 17% in 2008 compared to 19% in
2007. While Kronos’ average TiO2 selling
prices were higher in 2008, Kronos’ gross margin decreased primarily because of
lower sales volumes and higher manufacturing costs, which more than offset the
impact of higher sales prices. Changes in currency rates have also
negatively affected Kronos’ gross margin. We estimate the negative
effect of changes in currency exchange rates decreased income from operations by
approximately $4 million when comparing 2008 to 2007.
As a
percentage of net sales, selling, general and administrative expenses were
relatively consistent at approximately 12% and 13% for 2007 and 2008,
respectively.
Kronos’
income from operations in 2007 declined by 41% to $84.9 million compared to
2006; the income from operations as a percentage of net sales decreased to 6% in
2007 from 11% for 2006. The decline in income from operations is
driven by the decline in gross margin, which decreased to 19% in 2007 compared
to 24% in 2006. While Kronos’ sales volumes were higher in 2007,
gross margin decreased primarily because of lower average TiO2 selling
prices, lower production volumes and higher manufacturing costs, which more than
offset the impact of higher sales volumes. Changes in currency rates
have also negatively affected Kronos’ gross margin. Kronos estimates
the negative effect of changes in foreign currency exchange rates decreased
income from operations by approximately $4 million when comparing 2007 to
2006.
As a
percentage of net sales, selling, general and administrative expenses were
consistent at approximately 12% for both 2007 and 2006
Other
non-operating income (expense) – In 2006, Kronos
issued euro 400 million principal amount of 6.5% Senior Secured Notes, and used
the proceeds to redeem its euro 375 million principal amount of 8.875% Senior
Secured Notes. As a result of prepayment of the 8.875% Senior Secured
Notes, Kronos recognized a $22.3 million pre-tax interest charge ($14.5 million
net of income tax benefit.)
Effects of
currency exchange rates - Kronos
has substantial operations and assets located outside the United States
(primarily in Germany, Belgium, Norway and Canada). The majority of
sales generated from non-U.S. operations are denominated in currencies other
than the U.S. dollar, principally the euro, other major European currencies and
the Canadian dollar. A portion of sales generated from non-U.S.
operations are denominated in the U.S. dollar. Certain raw materials,
primarily titanium-containing feedstocks, are purchased in U.S. dollars, while
labor and other production costs are denominated primarily in local
currencies. Consequently, the translated U.S. dollar value of foreign
sales and operating results are subject to currency exchange rate fluctuations,
which may favorably or adversely impact reported earnings and may affect the
comparability of period-to-period operating results. Overall,
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates had the following effects on
Kronos’ net sales and income from operations for the periods
indicated.
|
|
Year
ended
December
31, 2007
vs. 2006
|
|
|
Year
ended
December
31, 2008
vs. 2007
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease), in
millions
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact
on:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net
sales
|
|
$ |
65 |
|
|
$ |
61 |
|
Income
from operations
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
Interest
expense –
Kronos’ interest expense increased $2.8 million from $39.4 million in 2007 to
$42.2 million in 2008 due to unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates in
2008 compared to 2007 and increased borrowings in 2008 (primarily under Kronos’
European credit facility).
Kronos’
interest expense decreased $3.8 million from $43.2 million for 2006 to $39.4
million for 2007 due to the issuance of the 6.5% Senior Secured Notes during
2006, which was partially offset by unfavorable changes in currency exchange
rates in 2007 compared to 2006.
Kronos
has a significant amount of indebtedness denominated in the euro, primarily its
6.5% Senior Secured Notes. The interest expense Kronos recognizes
will vary with fluctuations in the euro exchange rate.
Income taxes –
Kronos’ benefit for income taxes was $3.0 million in 2008 compared to an
income tax provision of $114.7 million for 2007. Some of the more
significant items impacting this reconciliation are summarized
below.
Income
tax benefit in 2008 includes:
·
|
A
non-cash benefit of $7.2 million relating to a European Court ruling that
resulted in the favorable resolution of certain income tax issues in
Germany and an increase in the amount of Kronos’ German corporate and
trade tax net operating loss carryforwards.
|
Income
tax expense in 2007 includes:
·
|
a
non-cash charge of $90.8 million relating to a decrease in Kronos’ net
deferred income tax asset in Germany resulting from the reduction in
income tax rates;
|
·
|
a
non-cash charge of $8.7 million relating to the adjustment of certain
German income tax attributes; and
|
·
|
a
non-cash income tax benefit of $2.0 million resulting from a net reduction
in Kronos’ reserve for uncertain tax
positions.
|
Income
tax benefit in 2006 includes:
·
|
an
income tax benefit of $21.7 million resulting from a favorable resolution
of certain income tax audits in Germany that resulted in an increase in
the amount of Kronos’ German trade tax net operating loss
carryforward;
|
·
|
an
income tax benefit of $10.7 million resulting from the reduction in
Kronos’ income tax contingency reserves related to favorable developments
with income tax audits in Belgium, Norway and
Germany;
|
·
|
an
income tax benefit of $1.4 million relating to the favorable resolution of
certain income tax audit issues in Germany and Belgium;
and
|
·
|
a
$1.1 million benefit resulting from the enactment of a reduction in
Canadian income tax rates.
|
Other
- On
September 22, 2005, the chloride-process TiO2 facility
operated by Kronos’ 50%-owned joint venture, Louisiana Pigment Company (“LPC”),
temporarily halted production due to Hurricane Rita, and as a result, both
Kronos and LPC filed claims with their insurers. Kronos recognized a
$1.8 million gain related to its business interruption claim in
2006.
Outlook –
Kronos currently expects income from operations will be lower in 2009 compared
to 2008 primarily from higher production costs resulting in part from
significantly reduced production volumes and the resulting unabsorbed fixed
production costs and unfavorable currency effects. Kronos currently
expects to report a net loss in 2009 as compared to reporting net income in 2008
due to lower expected income from operations in 2009.
In
response to the worldwide economic slowdown and weak consumer confidence, Kronos
is significantly reducing its production volumes in 2009 in order to reduce its
finished goods inventory and improve its liquidity. While overall
industry pigment demand is expected to be lower in 2009 as compared to 2008 as a
result of worldwide economic conditions, Kronos currently expects sales volumes
in 2009 will be slightly higher as compared to 2008, as it expects to gain
market share following anticipated reductions in industry capacity due to
competitors’ permanent plant shutdowns. Kronos believes average
selling prices in 2009 will decline from year end levels during the first half
of the year but will rise during the second half of 2009 which should result in
slightly higher average worldwide TiO2 selling
prices for the year. To mitigate the negative impact of its
significantly reduced production volumes, Kronos is reducing operating costs
where possible, such as; reducing maintenance expenditures, research development
expenditures and personnel costs.
Kronos’
expectations as to the future of the TiO2 industry
are based upon a number of factors beyond its control, including worldwide
growth of gross domestic product, competition in the marketplace, solvency and
continued operation of competitors, unexpected or earlier than expected capacity
additions or reductions and technological advances. If actual
developments differ from expectations, results of operations could be
unfavorably affected.
Kronos
believes that its annual attainable production capacity for 2009 is
approximately 532,000 metric tons. Kronos expect its production
volumes in 2009 will be significantly lower than attainable
capacity. Kronos currently expects that it will operate at 75% to 85%
of attainable production capacity in 2009. Expected capacity
utilization levels could be adjusted upwards or downwards to match changes in
demand for Kronos’ product.
General
corporate and other items
Interest and
dividend income –
Interest and dividend income in 2008 increased $3.2 million from 2007
primarily due to the interest received on certain escrow funds that we became
entitled to as part of the April 2008 litigation settlement
agreement. We recognized this as interest income during the second
quarter of 2008. See Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Interest
and dividend income in 2007 decreased $362,000 from 2006 due primarily to lower
levels of funds available for investment. Other interest and dividend
income fluctuates in part based upon the amount of funds invested and yields
thereon. We expect that interest income will be lower in 2009 than
2008 primarily due to the 2008 receipt of interest on certain escrow
funds.
Securities
transactions - In
October 2007 we sold 800,000 shares of TIMET common stock to Valhi for $26.8
million. The transaction was approved by the independent members of
our board of directors. We recognized a $22.7 million pre-tax
security transaction gain in the fourth quarter of 2007 related to the
sale. See Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Litigation
settlement gain – In October 2008 we recognized a $48.8 million gain
related to the initial closing associated with the settlement of condemnation
proceedings on certain real property we owned that is subject to environmental
remediation, and for which we had a carrying value of approximately $5.8 million
at the date of closing. A second closing is scheduled for April 2009,
and if that closing occurs we will receive additional consideration at that time
and recognize an additional gain. See Note 19 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Insurance
recoveries –
Insurance recoveries in 2006, 2007 and 2008 relate to amounts we received from
certain of our former insurance carriers, and relate principally to the recovery
of prior lead pigment and asbestos litigation defense costs incurred by
us. We have agreements with two former insurance carriers pursuant to
which the carriers reimburse us for a portion of our past and future lead
pigment and asbestos litigation defense costs, and the insurance recoveries in
2007 and 2008 include amounts we received from these carriers. We are not
able to determine how much we will ultimately recover from these carriers for
past defense costs we incurred because of certain issues that arise regarding
which past defense costs qualify for reimbursement. Insurance recoveries
in 2006 also include amounts we received for prior legal defense and indemnity
coverage for certain of our environmental expenditures. We do not
expect to receive any further material insurance settlements relating to
environmental remediation matters.
While we
continue to seek additional insurance recoveries for lead pigment and asbestos
litigation matters, we do not know the extent to which we will be successful in
obtaining reimbursement for either defense costs or indemnity. We have not
considered any additional potential insurance recoveries in determining accruals
for lead pigment litigation matters. Any additional insurance recoveries
would be recognized when the receipt is probable and the amount is
determinable. See Note 19 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Corporate
expenses –
Corporate expenses were $25.0 million in 2008, $6.3 million or 20% lower
than in 2007. Included in 2008 corporate expense are:
·
|
Litigation
and related costs of $14.6 million in 2008 compared to $22.1 in 2007;
and
|
·
|
Environmental
expenses of $6.8 million in 2008, compared to $4.4 million in
2007.
|
Corporate
expenses were $31.3 million in 2007, $7.1 million, or 29%, higher than in 2006
primarily due to higher litigation and related expense. Included in
2007 corporate expenses are:
·
|
Litigation
and related costs of $22.1 million in 2007 compared to $15.3 million in
2006; and
|
·
|
Environmental
expense of $4.4 million in 2007, compared to $4.3 million in
2006.
|
We expect
that net general corporate expenses in 2009 will be higher than in 2008,
primarily due to higher expected litigation and related expenses as well as
higher defined benefit pension plan expense.
Obligations for environmental
remediation costs are difficult to assess and estimate, and it is possible that
actual costs for environmental remediation will exceed accrued amounts or that
costs will be incurred in the future for sites in which we cannot currently
estimate our liability. If these events were to occur in 2009, our
corporate expenses would be higher than we currently estimate. See
Note 19 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Interest
expense -
Substantially all of our interest expense in 2006, 2007 and 2008 relates
to CompX. Interest expense increased $1.6 million in 2008 compared to
2007 and increased $541,000 in 2007 compared to 2006 due to the $52.6 million
promissory note entered into by CompX upon the repurchase and/or cancellation of
2.7 million shares of its Class A common stock in October 2007. See
Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Provision for
income taxes - We
recognized an income tax expense of $14.9 million in 2008 compared to a benefit
of $8.3 million in 2007 and an expense of $8.9 million in 2006. In accordance
with GAAP, we recognize deferred income taxes on our undistributed equity in
earnings of Kronos. We do not recognize, and we are not required to
pay, income taxes to the extent we receive dividends from
Kronos. Because we and Kronos are part of the same U.S. federal
income tax group, dividends we receive from Kronos are nontaxable to
us. Therefore, our effective income tax rate will generally be lower
than the U.S. federal statutory income tax rate in periods during which we
receive dividends from Kronos. In this regard, Kronos announced the
suspension of its regularly quarterly dividend in February 2009 in consideration
of the challenges and opportunities that exist in the TiO2 pigment
industry. If Kronos continues to not pay any dividends for the
remainder of 2009, our effective tax rate in 2009 would consequently be higher
as compared to 2008.
See Note
15 to our Consolidated Financial Statements for a tabular reconciliation of our
statutory tax expense to our actual tax expense. Some of the more
significant items impacting this reconciliation are summarized
below.
The
goodwill impairment charge of $10.1 million recorded in the third quarter of
2008 (see Note 8) is non-deductible goodwill for income tax
purposes. Accordingly, there is no income tax benefit associated with
the goodwill impairment charge for financial reporting purposes. Our
income tax expense in 2008 includes a $2.1 million benefit related to a net
reduction in our reserve for uncertain tax positions primarily due to a fourth
quarter recognition of unrecognized tax benefits because of statute of
limitation expirations.
Our
income tax benefit in 2007 includes a $1.3 million benefit related to a net
reduction in our reserve for uncertain tax positions primarily due to a third
quarter recognition of unrecognized tax benefits because of statute of
limitation expirations.
Our
income tax expense in 2006 includes a $142,000 benefit resulting from the
enactment of a reduction in Canadian income tax rates.
Minority
interest –
Minority interest in earnings decreased $3.0 million in 2008 as compared to
2007. This decrease is due to both our increased ownership of CompX
as compared to the same period last year and to lower earnings of CompX in
2008.
Minority
interest decreased $844,000 in 2007 as compared to 2006 primarily due to our
increased ownership percentage in CompX that resulted from CompX’s repurchase
and/or cancellation of its shares from TIMET. See Note 2 to our
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Related party
transactions – We are a party to certain transactions with related
parties. See Notes 2 and 17 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. It is our policy to engage in transactions with related
parties on terms, in our opinion, no less favorable to us than we could obtain
from unrelated parties.
Recent accounting
pronouncements -
See Note 21 to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Assumptions
on defined benefit pension plans and OPEB plans
Defined benefit
pension plans - We maintain various defined benefit pension plans in the
U.S. and the U.K., and Kronos maintains various defined benefit pension plans in
Europe, Canada and the U.S. See Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements.
We
account for our defined benefit pension plans in accordance with SFAS No. 87,
Employer’s Accounting for
Pensions, as amended. Under SFAS No. 87, defined benefit
pension plan expense and prepaid and accrued pension costs are each recognized
based on certain actuarial assumptions, principally the assumed discount rate,
the assumed long-term rate of return on plan assets and the assumed increase in
future compensation levels.
In
September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined
Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans. SFAS No. 158 requires
us to recognize an asset or liability for the over or under funded status of
each of our individual defined benefit pension plans on our Consolidated Balance
Sheets. This standard does not change the existing recognition and
measurement requirements that determine the amount of periodic benefit cost we
recognize in net income. We adopted the asset and liability
recognition and disclosure requirements of this standard effective December 31,
2006 on a prospective basis, in which we recognized through other comprehensive
income all of our prior unrecognized gains and losses and prior service costs or
credits, net of tax, as of December 31, 2006.
Prior to
December 31, 2007, we used a September 30 measurement date. Effective
December 31, 2007, we now use a December 31 measurement date, concurrent with
our adoption of the measurement date requirements of SFAS No. 158 effective
December 31, 2007. See Note 16 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
We
recognized consolidated defined benefit pension plan income of $2.2 million in
2006, $2.5 million in 2007 and $3.1 million in 2008. The amount of
funding requirements for these defined benefit pension plans is generally based
upon applicable regulations (such as ERISA in the U.S.), and will generally
differ from pension expense recognized under SFAS No. 87 for financial reporting
purposes. Contributions made to all of our plans aggregated $1.3
million in 2006, $900,000 in 2007, and $600,000 in 2008.
The discount rates we use for
determining defined benefit pension expense and the related pension obligations
are based on an approach of cash flow matching to a portfolio of high quality
corporate bonds in the applicable country where the defined benefit pension
benefits are being paid. In addition, we receive advice about
appropriate discount rates from our third-party actuaries, who may in some cases
utilize proprietary cash flow matching models. The discount rates are
adjusted as of each measurement date to reflect then-current interest rates on
such long-term bond portfolios. Such discount rates are used to
determine the actuarial present value of the pension obligations as of the
measurement date, and such discount rates are also used to determine the
interest component of defined benefit pension expense for the following
year.
At
December 31, 2008, approximately 86% of the projected benefit obligations
related to our plans in the U.S, with the remainder related to a plan in the
United Kingdom associated with a former disposed business unit. We
use different discount rate assumptions in determining our defined benefit
pension plan obligations and expense for the plans we maintain in the United
States and the U.K. as the interest rate environment differs from country to
country.
We used
the following discount rates for our defined benefit pension plans:
|
|
Discount
rates used for:
|
|
|
|
Obligations
at
December
31, 2006
and
expense in 2007
|
|
|
Obligations
at
December
31, 2007 and expense in 2008
|
|
|
Obligations
at
December
31, 2008 and expense in 2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
|
5.8 |
% |
|
|
6.1 |
% |
|
|
6.1 |
% |
United
Kingdom
|
|
|
5.0 |
% |
|
|
5.8 |
% |
|
|
6.0 |
% |
The assumed long-term rate of return on
plan assets represents the estimated average rate of earnings on the funds
invested or to be invested from the plans’ assets provided to fund the benefit
payments inherent in the projected benefit obligations. Unlike the
discount rate, which is adjusted each year based on changes in current long-term
interest rates, the assumed long-term rate of return on plan assets will not
necessarily change based upon the actual, short-term performance of the plan
assets in any given year. Defined benefit pension income (expense)
each year is based upon the assumed long-term rate of return on plan assets for
each plan and the actual fair value of the plan assets as of the beginning of
the year. Differences between the expected return on plan assets for
a given year and the actual return are deferred and amortized over future
periods based either upon the expected average remaining service life of the
active plan participants (for plans for which benefits are still being earned by
active employees) or the average remaining life expectancy of the inactive
participants (for plans in which benefits are not still being earned by active
employees).
At
December 31, 2008, approximately 85% of the plan assets related to plan assets
for our plans in the U.S., with the remainder related to the
U.K. plan. We use different long-term rates of return on
plan asset assumptions for our U.S. and U.K. defined benefit pension plan
expense because the respective plan assets are invested in a different mix of
investments and the long-term rates of return for different investments differ
from country to country.
In
determining the expected long-term rate of return on plan asset assumptions, we
consider the long-term asset mix (e.g. equity vs. fixed income) for the assets
for each of our plans and the expected long-term rates of return for such asset
components. In addition, we receive advice about appropriate
long-term rates of return from our third-party actuaries. At December
31, 2007 and 2008, substantially all of the assets attributable to U.S. plans
were invested in the Combined Master Retirement Trust (“CMRT”), a collective
investment trust sponsored by Contran to permit the collective investment by
certain master trusts which fund certain employee benefits plans sponsored by
Contran and certain of its affiliates.
The
CMRT’s long-term investment objective is to provide a rate of return exceeding a
composite of broad market equity and fixed income indices (including the S&P
500 and certain Russell indices) utilizing both third-party investment managers
as well as investments directed by Mr. Harold Simmons. Mr. Simmons is
the sole trustee of the CMRT. The trustee of the CMRT, along with the
CMRT's investment committee, of which Mr. Simmons is a member, actively manages
the investments of the CMRT. The trustee and investment committee
periodically change the asset mix of the CMRT based upon, among other things,
advice they receive from third-party advisors and their expectations as to what
asset mix will generate the greatest overall return. For the years
ended December 31, 2006, 2007 and 2008, the assumed long-term rate of return for
plan assets invested in the CMRT was 10%. In determining the
appropriateness of the rate of return assumption, we considered, among other
things, the historical rates of return for the CMRT, the current and projected
asset mix of the CMRT and the investment objectives of the CMRT's
managers. During the over 20-year history of the CMRT from its
inception in 1987 through December 31, 2008, the average annual rate of return
has been approximately 11%.
The CMRT
weighted-average asset allocation by asset category was as follows:
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
Equity
securities
|
|
|
98 |
% |
|
|
53 |
% |
Debt
securities
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Cash
and other
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
We
regularly review our actual asset allocation for each of our plans, and will
periodically rebalance the investments in each plan to more accurately reflect
the targeted allocation when considered appropriate.
Our assumed long-term rates of return
on plan assets for 2006, 2007 and 2008 were as follows:
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S.
|
|
|
10.0 |
% |
|
|
10.0 |
% |
|
|
10.0 |
% |
United
Kingdom
|
|
|
6.5 |
% |
|
|
6.5 |
% |
|
|
7.0 |
% |
We currently expect to utilize the same
long-term rate of return on plan asset assumptions in 2009 as we used in 2008
for purposes of determining the 2009 defined benefit pension plan
expense.
To the extent that a plan’s particular
pension benefit formula calculates the pension benefit in whole or in part based
upon future compensation levels, the projected benefit obligations and the
pension expense would be based in part upon expected increases in future
compensation levels. However, we have no active employees participating in our
defined benefit pension plans. Such plans are closed to additional
participants and assumptions regarding future compensation levels are not
applicable for our plans.
In addition to the actuarial
assumptions discussed above, because we maintain a defined benefit pension plan
in the U.K., the amount of recognized defined benefit pension expense and the
amount of prepaid and accrued pension costs will vary based upon relative
changes in foreign currency exchange rates.
A
reduction in the assumed discount rate generally results in an actuarial loss,
as the actuarially-determined present value of estimated future benefit payments
will increase. Conversely, an increase in the assumed discount rate
generally results in an actuarial gain. In addition, an actual return on
plan assets for a given year that is greater than the assumed return on plan
assets results in an actuarial gain, while an actual return on plan assets that
is less than the assumed return results in an actuarial loss. Other actual
outcomes that differ from previous assumptions, such as individuals living
longer or shorter than assumed in mortality tables which are also used to
determine the actuarially-determined present value of estimated future benefit
payments, changes in such mortality table themselves or plan amendments, will
also result in actuarial losses or gains. Accordingly, under GAAP we do
not recognize all of such actuarial gains and losses in earnings currently;
instead these amounts are deferred and amortized into income in the future as
part of net periodic defined benefit pension cost. However, upon
adoption of SFAS No. 158 effective December 31, 2006, these amounts are
recognized in other comprehensive income. See Note 16 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, any actuarial
gains generated in future periods would reduce the negative amortization effect
of any cumulative unrecognized actuarial losses, while any actuarial losses
generated in future periods would reduce the favorable amortization effect of
any cumulative unrecognized actuarial gains.
During
2008, all of our defined benefit pension plans generated a combined net
actuarial loss of approximately $31.6 million. This actuarial loss
resulted primarily from the general market decline and the actual return on plan
assets below the assumed return.
Based on the actuarial assumptions
described above and our current expectation for what actual average foreign
currency exchange rates will be during 2009, we expect that our defined benefit
pension expense will approximate $700,000 in 2009. In comparison, we
expect to be required to make approximately $600,000 of contributions to such
plans during 2009.
As noted above, defined benefit pension
expense and the amounts recognized as accrued pension costs are based upon the
actuarial assumptions discussed above. We believe that all of the
actuarial assumptions used are reasonable and appropriate. If we had
lowered the assumed discount rate by 25 basis points for all of our plans as of
December 31, 2008, our aggregate projected benefit obligations would have
increased by approximately $1.0 million at that date. Such a change
would not materially impact our defined benefit pension income for
2009. Similarly, if we lowered the assumed long-term rate of return
on plan assets by 25 basis points for all of our plans, our defined benefit
pension expense would be expected to increase by approximately $73,000 during
2009.
OPEB plans
- We
currently provide certain health care and life insurance benefits for eligible
retired employees. See Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. We account for such OPEB costs under SFAS No. 106, Employers Accounting for
Postretirement Benefits other than Pensions, as amended. Under
SFAS No. 106, OPEB expense and accrued OPEB costs are based on certain actuarial
assumptions, principally the assumed discount rate and the assumed rate of
increases in future health care costs.
We
recognized consolidated OPEB expense of $622,000 in 2006, $629,000 in 2007, and
$476,000 in 2008. Similar to defined benefit pension benefits, the
amount of funding will differ from the expense recognized for financial
reporting purposes, and contributions to the plans to cover benefit payments
aggregated $1.9 million in 2006, $1.5 million in 2007 and $1.1 million in
2008. Substantially all of our accrued OPEB cost relates to benefits
being paid to current retirees and their dependents, and no OPEB benefits are
being earned by current employees. As a result, the amount recognized
for OPEB expense for financial reporting purposes has been, and is expected to
continue to be, significantly less than the amount of OPEB benefit payments made
each year. Accordingly, the amount of accrued OPEB expense is
expected to decline gradually.
The assumed discount rates we utilize
for determining OPEB expense and the related accrued OPEB obligations are
generally based on the same discount rates we utilize for our defined benefit
pension plans.
In
estimating the health care cost trend rate, we consider our actual health care
cost experience, future benefit structures, industry trends and advice from our
third-party actuaries. In certain cases, we have the right to pass on
to retirees all or a portion of increases in health care
costs. During each of the past three years, we have assumed that the
relative increase in health care costs will generally trend downward over the
next several years, reflecting, among other things, assumed increases in
efficiency in the health care system and industry-wide and plan-design cost
containment initiatives. For example, at December 31, 2008 the
expected rate of increase in future health care costs ranges from 8.5% in 2009,
declining to 5.5% in 2014 and thereafter.
Based on the actuarial assumptions
described above and our current expectation for what actual average currency
exchange rates will be during 2009, we expect that our consolidated OPEB expense
will approximate $400,000 in 2009. In comparison, we expect to be
required to make approximately $1.2 million of contributions to such plans
during 2009.
We believe that all of the actuarial
assumptions used are reasonable and appropriate. If we had lowered
the assumed discount rate by 25 basis points for all of our OPEB plans as of
December 31, 2008, our aggregate projected benefit obligations would have
increased by approximately $200,000 at that date, and our OPEB expense would be
expected to decrease by less than $50,000 during 2009. Similarly, if
the assumed future health care cost trend rate had been increased by 100 basis
points, our accumulated OPEB obligations would have increased by approximately
$500,000 at December 31, 2008 and OPEB expense would have increased by less than
$50,000 in 2008.
Foreign
operations
CompX -
CompX has substantial operations and assets located outside the United
States, principally furniture component product operations in Canada and
Taiwan. At December 31, 2008, CompX had substantial net assets
denominated in the Canadian dollar and the New Taiwan dollar.
Kronos -
Kronos has substantial operations located outside the United States
(principally Europe and Canada) for which the functional currency is not the
U.S. dollar. As a result, the reported amount of our net investment
in Kronos will fluctuate based upon changes in currency exchange
rates. At December 31, 2008, Kronos had substantial net assets
denominated in the euro, Canadian dollar, Norwegian krone and British pound
sterling.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Consolidated
cash flows
Operating
activities
Trends in cash flows from operating
activities, excluding the impact of deferred taxes and relative changes in
assets and liabilities, are generally similar to trends in our income from
operations. Cash flows provided by operating activities increased
from $2.8 million used in operating activities in 2007 to $760,000 provided by
operating activities in 2008. The $3.5 million increase in cash
provided by operating activities includes the net effect of:
·
|
higher
income from operations in 2008 of $10.4 million (excluding both the $10.1
million non-cash goodwill impairment charge and the litigation settlement
pre-tax gain of $48.8 million), due primarily to lower litigation expense
of $7.5 million and lower depreciation and amortization in 2008 of $2.0
million;
|
·
|
higher
interest income of $3.2 million in 2008 primarily due to $4.3 million of
interest received from certain escrow
funds;
|
·
|
higher
cash paid for environmental liabilities in 2008 of $2.3
million;
|
·
|
lower
net cash provided by relative changes in our inventories and receivables
of $3.0 million; and
|
·
|
higher
cash paid for interest in 2008 of $2.2 million due to CompX’s issuance of
its note payable to an affiliate in the fourth quarter of
2007.
|
Cash
flows from operating activities decreased from $29.0 million provided by
operating activities in 2006 to $2.8 million used in operating activities in
2007. This $31.8 million decrease is primarily due to the net effect
of:
·
|
higher
cash paid for income taxes in 2007 of $23.3 million due in part to income
tax payments we made related to the capital gain generated from Valhi’s
distribution of TIMET common stock in March 2007 (as discussed in Note 4
to the Consolidated Financial Statements) and the U.S. income taxes
related to a higher amount of dividends CompX received from its non-U.S.
subsidiaries in 2007;
|
·
|
higher
cash paid for legal expenses in 2007 of $8.5
million;
|
·
|
lower
cash received for insurance recoveries in 2007 of $2.0 million;
and
|
·
|
lower
cash paid for environmental liabilities in 2007 of $3.4
million.
|
We do not
have complete access to CompX’s cash flows in part because we do not own 100% of
CompX. A detail of our consolidated cash flows from operating
activities is presented in the table below. Intercompany dividends
have been eliminated. The reference to NL Parent in the tables below
is a reference to NL Industries, Inc., as the parent company of CompX and our
other wholly-owned subsidiaries.
|
|
Years ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(In
millions)
|
|
Cash
provided by (used in) operating
activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CompX
|
|
$ |
27.4 |
|
|
$ |
11.9 |
|
|
$ |
15.7 |
|
NL
Parent and wholly-owned subsidiaries
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
(9.3 |
) |
|
|
(9.5 |
) |
Eliminations
|
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
|
|
(5.4 |
) |
|
|
(5.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
29.0 |
|
|
$ |
(2.8 |
) |
|
$ |
.8 |
|
Relative
changes in working capital can have a significant effect on cash flows from
operating activities. Our average days’-sales-outstanding (“DSO”) at
December 31, 2008 was 41 days compared to 44 days at December 31,
2007. The decrease is primarily due to the timing of collections on a
lower accounts receivable balance as of December 31, 2008. For
comparative purposes, our average DSO was 44 days for December 31, 2007 and 41
days at December 31, 2006. Our average number of days-in-inventory
(“DII”) was 70 days at December 31, 2008 and 63 days at December 31,
2007. The increase in DII is primarily due to lower sales in the
fourth quarter of 2008 which impacted the DII calculation, although in absolute
terms we reduced inventory by $1.6 million from 2007 to 2008. For
comparative purposes our average DII was 63 days at December 31, 2007 and 57
days at December 31, 2006. The increase is primarily due to the
higher cost of commodity raw materials during 2007 and higher inventory balances
associated with the facility consolidation in 2007.
Investing
activities
Net cash
provided by investing activities totaled $7.1 million in 2008 and $17.5 million
in 2007 compared to net cash used in 2006 of $25.2 million. Capital
expenditures, substantially all of which relate to CompX, were $6.9 million in
2008, $14.0 million in 2007 and $12.1 million in 2006. Capital
expenditure projects in 2008 emphasized improved production efficiency and
included $2.6 million spent to replace CompX’s waste water treatment equipment
at its South Carolina facility. Capital expenditures in 2006 and 2007
primarily emphasized improving CompX’s manufacturing facilities and investing in
manufacturing equipment which utilizes new technologies and increases automation
of the manufacturing process to provide for increased productivity and
efficiency.
During
2008:
·
|
We
received $39.6 million from the initial closing contained in a settlement
agreement related to condemnation proceedings on certain real property we
owned in New Jersey;
|
·
|
We
provided loans to affiliates in the amount of $19.2 million to Kronos and
$3.0 million to Valhi;
|
·
|
CompX
purchased approximately 126,000 shares of its common stock in market
transactions for $1.0 million;
|
·
|
We
purchased approximately 79,500 shares of Kronos common stock for $.8
million and approximately 79,000 shares of Valhi for $1.1 million in
market transactions; and
|
·
|
We
used a net $2.6 million of cash to fund two new escrow accounts related to
environmental matters (such escrow funds are classified as restricted
cash.)
|
In
addition during 2008 we received a $15 million promissory note related to the
settlement of condemnation proceedings. See Notes 9 and 19 to the
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
During
2007:
·
|
We
sold 800,000 shares of TIMET common stock to Valhi at a cash price of
$33.50 per share, or an aggregate of $26.8
million;
|
·
|
We
had additional net proceeds from sales of other marketable securities of
$4.2 million; and
|
·
|
CompX
purchased approximately 179,100 shares of its common stock in market
transactions for $3.3 million.
|
In
addition, during 2007 CompX repurchased or cancelled a net 2.7 million shares of
its Class A common stock held by TIMET, an affiliate, for $19.50 per share, or
aggregate consideration of $52.6 million, which was paid in the form of a
consolidated promissory note. See Notes 2 and 17 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements.
During
2006:
·
|
CompX
acquired a marine component products company for $9.8 million, net of cash
acquired; and
|
·
|
We
purchased 147,500 shares of CompX common stock in market transactions for
$2.3 million.
|
Financing
activities
Net cash
used in financing activities totaled $32.2 million, $27.3 million and $27.7
million in 2008, 2007 and 2006, respectively. We paid cash dividends
of $24.3 million ($.50 per share) in 2008, 2007 and 2006. Other
financing cash flows over the past three years consisted principally
of:
·
|
CompX
paid cash dividends to minority interests in the amount of $.8 million in
2008, $1.9 million in 2007 and $2.3 million in
2006;
|
·
|
CompX
prepaid $7.0 million in 2008 and $2.6 million in 2007 on its note payable
to TIMET and in 2006 prepaid $1.6 million of indebtedness assumed in its
August 2005 business acquisition;
|
·
|
We
received proceeds from the exercise of options to purchase CompX common
stock of $1.4 million in 2007 and $.3 million in
2006.
|
Provisions
contained in certain of CompX’s and Kronos’ credit agreements could result in
the acceleration of the applicable indebtedness prior to its stated maturity for
reasons other than defaults from failing to comply with typical financial
covenants. For example, certain credit agreements allow the lender to
accelerate the maturity of the indebtedness upon a change of control (as
defined) of the borrower. None of Kronos’ credit agreements contain
provisions that link the debt payment rates or schedules or borrowing
availability to its credit rating. In addition, certain credit
agreements could result in the acceleration of all or a portion of the
indebtedness following a sale of assets outside the ordinary course of
business.
CompX and
Kronos are in compliance with all of their debt covenants at December 31,
2008. Our and our affiliates’ ability to borrow funds under our
credit facilities in the future will, in some instances, depend in part on our
ability to maintain specified financial ratios and satisfy certain financial
covenants contained in the applicable credit agreement. In this
regard, Kronos currently expects that one of its required financial ratios of
its European credit facility may not be maintained during
2009. Kronos has begun discussions with the lenders to obtain a
waiver of such ratio. While we believe we can obtain such a waiver,
there is no assurance that such waiver would be obtained.
Liquidity
Our
primary source of liquidity on an ongoing basis is our cash flow from operating
activities. We generally use these amounts to (i) fund capital
expenditures (substantially all of which relate to CompX), (ii) pay ongoing
environmental remediation and legal expenses and (iii) provide for the payment
of debt service and dividends.
In
January 2009, CompX amended its secured revolving bank credit facility, which
extended the facility until January 15, 2012. Additionally, CompX
reduced the size of the credit facility from $50 million to $37.5 million, which
more appropriately reflects our potential borrowing needs. The credit
facility is collateralized by 65% of the ownership interests in CompX’s
first-tier non-United States subsidiaries. Provisions contained in
the Revolving Bank Credit Agreement could result in the acceleration of
outstanding indebtedness prior to its stated maturity for reasons other than
defaults from failing to comply with typical financial covenants. For
example, the Credit Agreement allows the lender to accelerate the maturity of
the indebtedness upon a change of control (as defined) of the
borrower. The terms of the Credit Agreement could result in the
acceleration of all or a portion of the indebtedness following a sale of assets
outside of the ordinary course of business. At December 31, 2008 we
had no balances outstanding under the facility.
In
October 2007, CompX repurchased and/or cancelled a net 2.7 million shares of its
Class A common stock from TIMET for aggregate consideration of $52.6 million,
which we paid in the form of a promissory note. See Note 12 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements.
At December 31, 2008, we had an
aggregate of $29.4 million of restricted and unrestricted cash, cash equivalents
and debt securities. A detail by entity is presented in the table
below.
CompX
|
|
$ |
14.4 |
|
NL
Parent and wholly-owned subsidiaries
|
|
|
15.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$ |
29.4 |
|
We
routinely compare our liquidity requirements and alternative uses of capital
against the estimated future cash flows we expect to receive from our
subsidiaries and affiliates. As a result of this process, we have in
the past and may in the future seek to raise additional capital, incur debt,
repurchase indebtedness in the market or otherwise, modify our dividend
policies, consider the sale of our interests in our subsidiaries, affiliates,
business units, marketable securities or other assets, or take a combination of
these and other steps, to increase liquidity, reduce indebtedness and fund
future activities. Such activities have in the past and may in the
future involve related companies.
We periodically evaluate acquisitions
of interests in or combinations with companies (including related companies)
perceived by management to be undervalued in the marketplace. These
companies may or may not be engaged in businesses related to our current
businesses. We intend to consider such acquisition activities in the
future and, in connection with this activity, may consider issuing additional
equity securities and increasing indebtedness. From time to time, we
also evaluate the restructuring of ownership interests among our respective
subsidiaries and related companies.
Based
upon our expectations of our operating performance, and the anticipated demands
on our cash resources we expect to have sufficient liquidity to meet our
short-term obligations (defined as the twelve-month period ending December 31,
2009). If actual developments differ from our expectations, our
liquidity could be adversely affected.
Capital
Expenditures
We
currently expect that our aggregate capital expenditures for CompX in 2009 will
be approximately $4 million. 2009 capital expenditures are expected
to be lower than in 2008 in response to the current economic conditions and are
limited to those expenditures required to meet the lower expected customer
demand and to properly maintain our facilities. Kronos intends to
spend approximately $29 million for major improvements and upgrades to existing
facilities during 2009, including approximately $3 million in the area of
environmental protection and compliance.
Dividends
Because
our operations are conducted primarily through subsidiaries and affiliates, our
long-term ability to meet parent company-level corporate obligations is largely
dependent on the receipt of dividends or other distributions from our
subsidiaries and affiliates. CompX currently pays a regular quarterly
dividend of $.125 per share. At that rate, and based on the 10.8
million shares of CompX we held at December 31, 2008, we would receive annual
dividends from CompX of $5.4 million. In addition, Valhi pays regular
quarterly dividends of $.10 per share. Based on the 4.8 million
shares of Valhi we held at December 31, 2008, we would receive annual dividends
from Valhi of $1.9 million. In February 2009, Kronos announced the suspension of
its regularly quarterly dividend in consideration of the challenges and
opportunities that exist in the TiO2 pigment
industry. Also in February 2009, TIMET announced the suspension of its regular
quarterly dividend on its common stock in consideration of the challenges and
opportunities that exist in the titanium metals industry.
Investments
in our Subsidiaries and Affiliates and other Acquisitions
We have
in the past, and may in the future, purchase the securities of our subsidiaries
and affiliates or third-parties in market or privately-negotiated
transactions. We base our purchase decisions on a variety of factors,
including an analysis of the optimal use of our capital, taking into account the
market value of the securities and the relative value of expected returns on
alternative investments. In connection with these activities, we may
consider issuing additional equity securities or increasing our
indebtedness. We may also evaluate the restructuring of ownership
interests of our businesses among our subsidiaries and related
companies.
During
2008 we purchased approximately 79,000 shares of Valhi in open-market
transactions for an aggregate amount of $1.1 million. Also during
2008 we purchased approximately 79,500 shares of Kronos in open–market
transactions for an aggregate amount of $800,000. See Notes 4 and 7
to our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Summary
of debt and other contractual commitments
As more
fully described in the notes to our Consolidated Financial Statements, we are
party to various debt, lease and other agreements which contractually and
unconditionally commit us to pay certain amounts in the future. See
Notes 12 and 19 to our Consolidated Financial Statements. The
following table summarizes our contractual commitments as of December 31, 2008
by the type and date of payment.
|
|
Payment due date
|
|
Contractual commitment
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
2010/2011 |
|
|
|
2012/2013 |
|
|
2014
and
After
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In
millions)
|
|
Note
and interest payable to affiliate
|
|
$ |
3.1 |
|
|
$ |
6.1 |
|
|
$ |
5.9 |
|
|
$ |
39.4 |
|
|
$ |
54.5 |
|
Estimated
tax obligations
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
Operating
leases
|
|
|
.6 |
|
|
|
.7 |
|
|
|
.2 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Purchase
obligations
|
|
|
16.5 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
16.5 |
|
Fixed
asset acquisitions
|
|
|
.6 |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
22.7 |
|
|
$ |
6.8 |
|
|
$ |
6.1 |
|
|
$ |
39.4 |
|
|
$ |
75.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
The
timing and amount shown for our commitments related to notes payable, operating
leases and fixed asset acquisitions are based upon the contractual payment
amount and the contractual payment date for such commitments. The
timing and amount shown for raw material and other purchase obligations, which
consist of all open purchase orders and contractual obligations (primarily
commitments to purchase raw materials) is also based on the contractual payment
amount and the contractual payment date for such commitments. The
amount shown for income taxes is the consolidated amount of income taxes payable
including the net amount payable to Valhi under our tax sharing agreement at
December 31, 2008, which is assumed to be paid during 2009. Fixed
asset acquisitions include firm purchase commitments for capital
projects.
The above
table does not reflect any amounts that we might pay to fund our defined benefit
pension and OPEB plans, as the timing and amount of any such future fundings are
unknown and dependent on, among other things, the future performance of defined
benefit pension plan assets, interest rate assumptions and actual future retiree
medical costs. Such defined benefit pension plans and OPEB plans are
discussed above in greater detail.
The above
table also does not reflect any amounts that we might pay to settle any of our
uncertain tax positions, as the timing and amount of any such future settlements
are unknown and dependent on, among other things, the timing of tax
audits. See Notes 15 and 21 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Commitments
and contingencies
We are subject to certain commitments
and contingencies, as more fully described in Note 19 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements or in Part I, Item 3 of this report. In addition
to those legal proceedings described in Note 19 to our Consolidated Financial
Statements, various legislation and administrative regulations have, from time
to time, been proposed that seek to (i) impose various obligations on present
and former manufacturers of lead pigment and lead-based paint (including us)
with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the use of such
products and (ii) effectively overturn court decisions in which we and other
pigment manufacturers have been successful. Examples of such proposed
legislation include bills which would permit civil liability for damages on the
basis of market share, rather than requiring plaintiffs to prove that the
defendant's product caused the alleged damage, and bills which would revive
actions barred by the statute of limitations. While no legislation or
regulations have been enacted to date that are expected to have a material
adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or
liquidity, enactment of such legislation could have such an
effect.
Off
balance sheet financing arrangements
Other
than operating lease commitments disclosed in Note 19 to our Consolidated
Financial Statements, we are not party to any material off-balance sheet
financing arrangements.
ITEM
7A. QUANTITATIVE
AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
General - We are exposed to market
risk from changes in currency exchange rates, interest rates, raw materials and
equity security prices.
Interest
rates - We are
exposed to market risk from changes in interest rates, primarily related to our
indebtedness.
At
December 31, 2008 and 2007, CompX had no amounts outstanding under its secured
Revolving Bank Credit Agreement. In conjunction with CompX’s
repurchase and/or cancellation of a net 2.7 million shares of its class A common
stock, during the fourth quarter of 2007, CompX issued a promissory note for
$52.6 million. See Notes 12 and 17 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements. At December 31, 2008, there was $43.0 million outstanding
on the promissory note ($50.0 million at December 31, 2007) which bears interest
at LIBOR plus 1%, (5.05% and 5.98% at December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively)
and the fair value of such indebtedness approximates its carrying
value. The interest rate is reset quarterly based on the three month
LIBOR.
Foreign currency
exchange rates -
We are exposed to market risk arising from changes in currency exchange
rates as a result of manufacturing and selling our products outside the United
States (principally Canada and Taiwan). A portion of sales generated
from our non-U.S. operations are denominated in currencies other than the U.S.
dollar, principally the Canadian dollar and the New Taiwan dollar. In
addition, a portion of our sales generated from our non-U.S. operations are
denominated in the U.S. dollar. Most raw materials, labor and other
production costs for such non-U.S. operations are denominated primarily in local
currencies. Consequently, the translated U.S. dollar value of our
non-U.S. sales and operating results are subject to currency exchange rate
fluctuations which may favorably or unfavorably impact reported earnings and may
affect comparability of period-to-period operating results.
As
mentioned above, certain of our sales generated by CompX’s non-U.S. operations
are denominated in U.S. dollars. To mitigate the financial statement
impact of changes in currency exchange rates, CompX periodically enters into
forward currency contracts. At each balance sheet date, outstanding
forward currency contracts are marked to market with any resulting gain or loss
recognized in income currently unless the contract is designated as a hedge upon
which the mark-to-market adjustment is recorded in other comprehensive
income. To manage a portion of the currency exchange rate market risk
associated with receivables, or similar exchange rate risk associated with
future sales, at December 31, 2008 CompX had entered into a series of short-term
forward currency exchange contracts to exchange an aggregate of $7.5 million for
an equivalent value of Canadian dollars at exchange rates of Cdn. $1.25 to $1.26
per U.S. dollar. These contracts qualified for hedge accounting and
mature through June 2009. At December 31, 2008, the actual exchange
rate was Cdn. $1.22 per U.S. dollar. The estimated fair value of such
contracts was not material at December 31, 2008. We had no forward
currency contracts outstanding at December 31, 2007.
Marketable equity
and debt security prices
- We are exposed to market risk due to changes in prices of the
marketable securities which we own. The fair value of equity
securities at December 31, 2007 and 2008 was $113.4 million and $64.0 million,
respectively. The potential change in the aggregate fair value of
these investments, assuming a 10% change in prices, would be $11.3 million at
December 31, 2007 and $6.4 million at December 31, 2008. The fair
value of marketable debt securities at December 31, 2007 was $5.9 million and
was $5.5 million at December 31, 2008. The potential change in the
aggregate fair value of these investments assuming a 10% change in prices would
be $590,000 at December 31, 2007 and $550,000 at December 31, 2008.
Raw materials
- CompX will
occasionally enter into raw material arrangements to mitigate the short-term
impact if future increases in raw material costs. Otherwise, we
generally do not have long-term supply agreements for our raw material
requirements because either we believe the risk of unavailability of those raw
materials is low and we believe the price to be stable or because long-term
supply agreements for those materials are generally not available. We
do not engage in commodity hedging programs.
Other - We believe there may be a
certain amount of incompleteness in the sensitivity analyses presented
above. For example, the hypothetical effect of changes in interest
rates discussed above ignores the potential effect on other variables which
affect our results of operations and cash flows, such as demand for our
products, sales volumes, selling prices and operating
expenses. Contrary to the above assumptions, changes in interest
rates rarely result in simultaneous parallel shifts along the yield
curve. Accordingly, the amounts presented above are not necessarily
an accurate reflection of the potential losses we would incur assuming the
hypothetical changes in market prices were actually to occur.
The above discussion and estimated
sensitivity analysis amounts include forward-looking statements of market risk
which assume hypothetical changes in market prices. Actual future
market conditions will likely differ materially from such
assumptions. Accordingly, such forward-looking statements should not
be considered to be projections of future events, gains or losses.
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
The information called for by this Item
is contained in a separate section of this Annual Report. See "Index
of Financial Statements and Schedules" (page F-1).
ITEM 9.
|
CHANGES
IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL
DISCLOSURE
|
None.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS
AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation
of disclosure controls and procedures
We
maintain a system of disclosure controls and procedures. The term
"disclosure controls and procedures," as defined by Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e),
means controls and other procedures that are designed to ensure that information
required to be disclosed in the reports that we file or submit to the SEC under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"), is recorded,
processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the
SEC's rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include,
without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information
we are required to disclose in the reports we file or submit to the SEC under
the Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our
principal executive officer and our principal financial officer, or persons
performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions to be
made regarding required disclosure. Each of Harold C. Simmons, our
Chief Executive Officer, and Gregory M. Swalwell, our Vice President, Finance
and Chief Financial Officer, have evaluated the design and effectiveness of our
disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2008. Based
upon their evaluation, these executive officers have concluded that our
disclosure controls and procedures are effective as of December 31,
2008.
Internal
control over financial reporting
We also
maintain internal control over financial reporting. The term
“internal control over financial reporting,” as defined by Exchange Act Rule
13a-15(f) means a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our
principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing
similar functions, and effected by the board of directors, management and other
personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external
purposes in accordance with GAAP, and includes those policies and procedures
that:
·
|
pertain
to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our
assets,
|
·
|
provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that
receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors,
and
|
·
|
provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of an
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of assets that could have a
material effect on our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
|
Section
404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires us to report on internal control
over financial reporting in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2008. Our independent registered public accounting firm
is also required to audit our internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2008.
As
permitted by the SEC, our assessment of internal control over financial
reporting excludes (i) internal control over financial reporting of equity
method investees and (ii) internal control over the preparation of our financial
statement schedules required by Article 12 of Regulation
S-X. However, our assessment of internal control over financial
reporting with respect to equity method investees did include controls over the
recording of amounts related to our investment that are recorded in the
consolidated financial statements, including controls over the selection of
accounting methods for our investments, the recognition of equity method
earnings and losses and the determination, valuation and recording of our
investment account balances.
Changes
in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There has
been no change to our internal control over financial reporting during the
quarter ended December 31, 2008 that has materially affected, or is reasonably
likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial
reporting.
Management’s
Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Our
management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal
control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f). Our evaluation of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting is based upon the criteria established
in Internal Control –
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission (commonly referred to as the “COSO”
framework). Based on our evaluation under that framework, we have
concluded that our internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
December 31, 2008.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the
independent registered public accounting firm that has audited our consolidated
financial statements included in this Annual Report, has audited the
effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December
31, 2008, as stated in their report which is included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K.
Certifications
Our chief executive officer
is required to annually file a certification with the New York Stock Exchange
(“NYSE”), certifying our compliance with the corporate governance listing
standards of the NYSE. During 2008, our chief executive officer filed
such annual certification with the NYSE. The 2008 certification was
unqualified.
Our chief
executive officer and chief financial officer are also required to, among other
things, quarterly file certifications with the SEC regarding the quality of our
public disclosures, as required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002. We have filed the certifications for the quarter ended December
31, 2008 as Exhibits 31.1 and 31.2 to this Annual Report on Form
10-K.
ITEM 9B. OTHER
INFORMATION
Not applicable.
PART
III
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS,
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE.
The information required by this Item
is incorporated by reference to our definitive Proxy Statement to be filed with
the SEC pursuant to Regulation 14A within 120 days after the end of the fiscal
year covered by this report (the "NL Proxy Statement").
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE
COMPENSATION.
The information required by this Item
is incorporated by reference to the NL Proxy Statement.
ITEM 12. SECURITY
OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER
MATTERS.
The information required by this Item
is incorporated by reference to the NL Proxy Statement.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN
RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE.
The information required by this Item
is incorporated by reference to the NL Proxy Statement. See also Note
17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES.
The
Information required by this Item is incorporated by reference to the NL Proxy
Statement.
PART
IV
ITEM
15. EXHIBITS
AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a)
and (c)
|
Financial
Statements and Schedules
|
The
Registrant
The
consolidated financial statements and schedules of the Registrant listed on the
accompanying Index of Financial Statements and Schedules (see page F-1) are
filed as part of this Annual Report.
50%-or-less persons
|
The
consolidated financial statements of Kronos (36%-owned at December 31,
2008) are incorporated by reference in Exhibit 99.1 of this Annual Report
pursuant to Rule 3-09 of Regulation S-X. Management’s Report on
Internal Control Over Financial Reporting of Kronos is not included as
part of Exhibit 99.1. The Registrant is not required to provide
any other consolidated financial statements pursuant to Rule 3-09 of
Regulation S-X.
|
We have
included as exhibits the items listed in the Exhibit Index. We will
furnish a copy of any of the exhibits listed below upon payment of $4.00 per
exhibit to cover the costs to us of furnishing the exhibits. Pursuant
to Item 601(b)(4)(iii) of Regulation S-K, any instrument defining the rights of
holders of long-term debt issues and other agreements related to indebtedness
which do not exceed 10% of consolidated total assets as of December 31, 2008
will be furnished to the Commission upon request.
We will
also furnish, without charge, a copy of our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics,
as adopted by the board of directors on February 19, 2004, upon
request. Such requests should be directed to the attention of our
Corporate Secretary at our corporate offices located at 5430 LBJ Freeway, Suite
1700, Dallas, Texas 75240.
Item
No. Exhibit
Index
2.1
|
Form
of Distribution Agreement between NL Industries, Inc. and Kronos
Worldwide, Inc. – incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to the Kronos
Worldwide, Inc. Registration Statement on Form 10 (File No.
001-31763).
|
3.1
|
Certificate
of Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation dated May 22,
2008 - incorporated by reference to Exhibit 1 to the Registrant’s
Proxy Statement on Schedule 14A for the annual meeting held on May 21,
2008.
|
3.2
|
Amended
and Restated Bylaws of NL Industries, Inc. as of May 23, 2008 –
incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.1 of the Registrant’s Current
Report on Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
on May 23, 2008.
|
4.1
|
Indenture
governing the 6.5% Senior Secured Notes due 2013,
dated
|
|
as
of April 11, 2006, between Kronos International, Inc. and
The
|
|
Bank
of New York, as trustee (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to the
Current Report on Form 8-K of Kronos International, Inc. (File No.
333-100047) that was filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission on April 11, 2006).
|
10.1
|
Lease
Contract dated June 21, 1952, between Farbenfabriken Bayer
Aktiengesellschaft and Titangesellschaft mit beschrankter Haftung (German
language version and English translation thereof) - incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31,
1985.
|
10.2
|
Formation
Agreement dated as of October 18, 1993 among Tioxide Americas Inc., Kronos
Louisiana, Inc. and Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P. - incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,
1993.
|
10.3
|
Joint
Venture Agreement dated as of October 18, 1993 between Tioxide Americas
Inc. and Kronos Louisiana, Inc. - incorporated by reference to Exhibit
10.3 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended September 30, 1993.
|
10.4
|
Kronos
Offtake Agreement dated as of October 18, 1993 between Kronos Louisiana,
Inc. and Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P. - incorporated by reference to
Exhibit 10.4 to the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended September 30, 1993.
|
10.5
|
Amendment
No. 1 to Kronos Offtake Agreement dated as of December 20, 1995 between
Kronos Louisiana, Inc. and Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P. - incorporated
by reference to Exhibit 10.22 to the Registrant’s Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended December 31,
1995.
|