CPI AEROSTRUCTURES INC - Annual Report: 2016 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION 

Washington, D.C. 20549

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, 2016

Commission file number 1-11398

CPI AEROSTRUCTURES, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

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  ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.

Yes  ☐    No  ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months, and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.

Yes   ☒    No  ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes  ☒  No  ☐

Indicate by check mark if the 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.  ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12-b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Yes  ☐     No  ☒

As of June 30, 2016 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter), the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock (based on its reported last sale price on the NYSE MKT of $6.15) held by non-affiliates of the registrant was $47,792,843.

As of March 1, 2017, the registrant had 8,752,171 common shares, $.001 par value, outstanding.

 Documents Incorporated by Reference:

Part III (Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14) from the definitive Proxy Statement for the 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than 120 days after the end of the Registrant’s fiscal year covered by this report.

CPI AEROSTRUCTURES, INC. 

FORM 10-K ANNUAL REPORT 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I

Item 1. BUSINESS

General

CPI Aerostructures, Inc. (“CPI Aero®” or the “Company”) is a United States (“U.S.”) supplier of aircraft parts for fixed wing aircraft and helicopters in both the commercial and defense markets. We are a manufacturer of structural aircraft parts and aerosystems. Additionally, we leverage our global supply chain skills to assist our customers in managing a diverse worldwide supplier market by providing “one stop shopping” for an assortment of aerospace parts. Within the global aerostructures supply chain, we are either a Tier 1 supplier to aircraft original equipment manufacturers (“OEMs”) or a Tier 2 subcontractor to major Tier 1 manufacturers. We also are a prime contractor to the U.S. Department of Defense, primarily the United States Air Force (“USAF”). In addition to our assembly operations, we provide engineering; program management, supply chain management, and maintenance repair and overhaul (“MRO”) services.

Among the key programs that CPI Aero supplies are the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye surveillance aircraft, the A-10 Thunderbolt attack jet, the Gulfstream G650, the UH-60 BLACK HAWK® helicopter, the S-92® helicopter, the MH-60S mine countermeasure helicopter, the AH-1Z ZULU attack helicopter, the HondaJet-Advanced Light Jet, the MH-53 and CH-53 variant helicopters, the C-5A Galaxy cargo jet, the F-16 fighter aircraft, the Embraer Phenom 300 light business jet and the Cessna Citation X+.

We are a subcontractor for leading defense prime contractors such as Northrop Grumman Corporation (“NGC”), The Boeing Company (“Boeing”), Lockheed Martin Corporation (“Lockheed”), Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation (“Sikorsky”) and Bell Helicopter (“Bell”). 46%, 57% and 5% of our revenue in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, was generated by subcontracts with defense prime contractors. Our 2016 and 2014 defense subcontractor revenue was significantly decreased because of the change in estimate on the A-10 program, described in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (“MDA”).

We also operate as a subcontractor to prime commercial contractors, including Sikorsky, Honda Aircraft Company, Inc. (“Honda”), Embraer S.A. (“Embraer”) and The Triumph Group (“Triumph”), in the production of commercial aircraft parts. 50%, 42% and 93% of our revenue in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, was generated by commercial contract sales.

CPI Aero has over 36 years of experience as a contractor. Most members of our management team have held management positions at large aerospace contractors, including NGC and GKN. Our technical team possesses extensive technical expertise and program management and integration capabilities. Our competitive advantage lies in our ability to offer large contractor capabilities with the flexibility and responsiveness of a small company, while staying competitive in cost and delivering superior quality products.

CPI Aero was incorporated under the laws of the State of New York in January 1980 under the name Composite Products International, Inc. CPI Aero changed its name to Consortium of Precision Industries, Inc. in April 1989 and to CPI Aerostructures, Inc. in July 1992. In January 2005, we began doing business under the name CPI Aero®, a registered trademark of the Company. Our principal office is located at 91 Heartland Blvd., Edgewood, New York 11717 and our telephone number is (631) 586-5200.

We maintain a website located at www.cpiaero.com. Our corporate filings, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, our Current Reports on Form 8-K, our proxy statements and reports filed by our officers and directors under Section 16-(a) of the Securities Exchange Act, and any amendments to those filings, are available, free of charge, on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with the Securities and Exchange Commission. We do not intend for information contained in our website to be a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Significant Contracts

Some of our significant contracts are as follows:

Military Aircraft – Subcontracts with Prime Contractors

E-2D “Advanced Hawkeye” The NGC E-2 Hawkeye is an all-weather, carrier-based tactical Airborne Early Warning aircraft. The twin turboprop aircraft was designed and developed in the 1950s by the Grumman Aircraft Company for the United States Navy as a replacement for the E-1 Tracer. The United States Navy aircraft has been progressively updated with the latest variant, the E-2D, first flying in 2007. In 2008, we received an initial $7.9 million order from NGC to provide structural kits for the E-2D. We initially valued the long-term agreement at approximately $98 million over an eight-year period, with the potential to be in excess of $195 million over the life of the aircraft program. The cumulative orders we have received on this program through January 2017 exceed $144 million.

In addition, in 2015 we won an award to supply structural components and kits for the Outer Wing Panel (“OWP”) on the E-2D Advanced Hawkeye airborne early warning and control (“AEW&C”) aircraft that will be manufactured for Japan. We will be responsible for component source selection, supply chain management, delivery of kits, and will provide manufacturing engineering services to NGC during the integration of the components into the OWP. The contract from NGC is valued at between $25 million and $30 million.

A-10 “Thunderbolt” The A-10 Thunderbolt II is a single-seat, twin-engine, straight-wing jet aircraft developed by Fairchild-Republic for the United States Air Force to provide close air support of ground forces by attacking tanks, armored vehicles, and other ground targets with a limited air interdiction capability. It is the first U.S. Air Force aircraft designed exclusively for close air support. In 2008, we received an initial order of $3.2 million from the Integrated Defense Systems unit of Boeing in support of its $2 billion award to produce up to 242 enhanced wings for the A-10.

UH-60 “BLACK HAWK” The UH-60 BLACK HAWK helicopter is the leader in multi-mission-type aircraft. Among the mission configurations its serves are troop transport, medical evacuation, electronic warfare, attack, assault support and special operations. More than 3,000 BLACK HAWK helicopters are in use today, operating in 29 countries. We have long-term agreements from Sikorsky to manufacture gunner window assemblies, fuel panel assemblies, and perform MRO on stabilators for the BLACK HAWK helicopter through 2018.

F-16 “Fighting Falcon” The Lockheed Martin Fighting Falcon is a single-engine multirole fighter aircraft. Originally developed by General Dynamics for the USAF, over 2,900 F-16 aircraft are flown by the USAF and by air forces around the world today. CPI Aero has a contract with United Technologies Aerospace Systems to manufacture pod structures for the DB-110 reconnaissance system, which is used primarily on exported F-16 aircraft.

Commercial Aircraft – Subcontracts with Prime Contractors

Gulfstream G650 In March 2008, Spirit Aerosystems (“Spirit”) awarded us a contract to provide leading edges for the Gulfstream G650 business jet, a commercial program that Spirit was supporting. In December 2014, Spirit transferred its work-scope on this program to Triumph. We will continue to provide leading edges for the G650 as our purchase orders and long term agreement have transferred to Triumph.

HondaJet In May 2011, Honda awarded us a contract to manufacture engine inlets and flaps and vane assemblies for the HondaJet advanced light business jet. We have received approximately $23.6 million in orders on this program through December 2016. We estimate the potential value of this program to be approximately $70 million.

Embraer Phenom 300 In May 2012, Embraer awarded us a contract to manufacture engine inlets for the Embraer Phenom 300 business jet. We have received approximately $28.90 million in orders on this program through December 2016. We estimate the potential value of the program to be in excess of $40 million.

Cessna Citation X In November 2012, Cessna Aircraft Company (“Cessna”) awarded us a contract to supply structural assemblies, predominately wing spars, for Cessna’s flagship aircraft, the newly-relaunched Cessna Citation X. We have received approximately $15.6 million in orders on this program through December 2016.

Military Aircraft – Prime Contracts with U.S. Government

F-16 “Fighting Falcon” In November 2014, The Defense Logistics Agency (“DLA”) awarded CPI Aero a multi-year contract to provide structural wing components and logistical support for global F-16 aircraft MRO operations. We estimate the value of the contract, including options, to be approximately $53.5 million.

Sales and Marketing

We are recognized within the aerospace industry as a Tier 1 or Tier 2 supplier to major aircraft suppliers. Additionally, we may bid for military contracts set aside specifically for small businesses.

We are awarded contracts for our products and services through the process of competitive bidding. This process begins when we first learn, formally or otherwise, of a potential contract from a prospective customer and concludes after all negotiations are completed upon award. When preparing our response to a prospective customer for a potential contract, we evaluate the contract requirements and determine and outline the services and products we can provide to fulfill the contract at a competitive price. Each contract also benefits from various additional services that we offer, including program management, engineering, and global supply chain program management, which streamlines the vendor management and procurement process and monitors the progress, timing, and quality of component delivery.

Our average sales cycle, which generally commences at the time a prospective customer issues a request for proposal and ends upon delivery of the final product to the customer, varies widely.

Because of the complexities inherent in the aerospace industry, the time from the initial request for proposal to award ranges from as little as a few weeks to several years. Additionally, our contracts have ranged from six months to as long as ten years. Also, repeat and follow-on jobs for current contracts frequently provide additional opportunities with minimal start-up costs and rapid rates to production.

The Market

Since our founding in 1980 until 2007, our Company concentrated on manufacturing small assemblies and structures to prime contractors for use by the U.S. Military. Government-based contracts are subject to the national defense budget and procurement funding decisions which, accordingly, drives demand for our business in that market. Government spending and budgeting for procurement, operations and maintenance are affected not only by military action, but also the related fiscal consequences of these actions, as well as the political electoral process.

Since 2008, we have widened the scope of our target markets, positioning our Company to take advantage of the opportunities a broader customer base provides while simultaneously reducing the impact of direct government contracting limitations. Our success as a subcontractor to defense prime contractors has provided us with opportunities to act as a subcontractor to prime contractors in the production of commercial aircraft structures, which also reduced our exposure to government spending decisions.

Over time, our Company has expanded both in size and capabilities, with growth in our operational and global supply chain program management. These expansions have allowed us the ability to supply more complex aerostructure assemblies and aerosystems and structures in support of our government-based programs as well as to pursue opportunities within the commercial and business jet markets. Our capabilities have also allowed us to acquire MRO and kitting contracts.

Approximately $8.7 million, $9.9 million and $7.1 million of our revenue for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, was from customers outside the U.S. All other revenue for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016 has been attributable to customers within the U.S. We have no assets outside the U.S.

Backlog

We produce custom assemblies pursuant to long-term contracts and customer purchase orders. Backlog consists of aggregate values under such contracts and purchase orders, excluding the portion previously included in operating revenues on the basis of percentage of completion accounting, and including estimates of future contract price escalation. Substantially all of our backlog is subject to termination at will and rescheduling, without significant penalty. Funds are often appropriated for programs or contracts on a yearly or quarterly basis, even though the contract may call for performance that is expected to take a number of years. Therefore, our funded backlog does not include the full value of our contracts. Our total backlog as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 was as follows:

Approximately 77% of the total amount of our backlog at December 31, 2016 was attributable to government contracts. Our backlog attributable to government contracts at December 31, 2016 and 2015 was as follows:

Our backlog attributable to commercial contracts at December 31, 2016 and 2015 was as follows:

Our unfunded backlog is primarily comprised of the long-term contracts that we received from Spirit and NGC during 2008, Honda and Bell during 2011 and Cessna, Sikorsky and Embraer during 2012. These long-term contracts are expected to have yearly orders which will be funded in the future.

Approximately 66% of the funded backlog at December 31, 2016 is expected to be recognized as revenue during 2017.

Material and Parts

We subcontract production of substantially all parts incorporated into our products to third party manufacturers under firm fixed price orders. Our decision to purchase certain components generally is based upon whether the components are available to meet required specifications at a cost and with a delivery schedule consistent with customer requirements. From time to time, we are required to purchase custom made parts from sole suppliers and manufacturers in order to meet specific customer requirements.

We obtain our raw materials from several commercial sources. Although certain items are only available from limited sources of supply, we believe that the loss of any single supplier would not have a material adverse effect on our business.

Competition

We face competition in our role as both a prime contractor to the U.S. Government and as a Tier 1 or Tier 2 subcontractor to military and commercial aircraft manufacturers.  For certain unrestricted contracts for the U.S. Government, we may compete against well-established prime contractors, including NGC, Lockheed and Boeing.  All of these competitors possess significantly larger infrastructures, greater resources and the capabilities to respond to much larger contracts.  We believe that our competitive advantage lies in our ability to offer large contractor capabilities with the flexibility and responsiveness of a small company, while staying competitive in cost and delivering superior quality products.  While larger prime contractors compete for significant modification awards, they generally do not compete for awards in smaller modifications, spares and replacement parts, even for aircraft for which they are the original manufacturer.  In certain instances, the large prime contractors often subcontract much of the work they win to their Tier 1 suppliers so we also may act as a subcontractor to some of these major prime contractors. Further, in some cases, these companies are not permitted to bid, for example when the U.S. Government designates a contract as a Small Business Set-Aside.  In these restricted contracts for the U.S. Government, CPI Aero typically competes against numerous small business competitors.  We believe we compete effectively against the smaller competitors because smaller competitors generally do not have the expertise we have in responding to requests for proposals for government contracts, nor will they typically have the more than 35 years of past performance in conducting more than 2000 contracts for the U.S. Government.

We also compete at the Tier 1 and Tier 2 levels for work for major subcontracts with OEMs in both the military and commercial markets.  We often compete against much larger Tier 1 suppliers, such as Triumph Group, Spirit AeroSystems, Kaman Aerospace, GKN Aerospace, Ducommun, LMI Aerospace, and Precision Castparts Corp.  We believe that we can compete effectively with these larger companies by delivering products with the same level of quality and performance at a better value for our customer.

Government Regulation

Environmental Regulation

We are subject to regulations administered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, various state agencies and county and local authorities acting in cooperation with federal and state authorities. Among other things, these regulatory bodies impose restrictions to control air, soil and water pollution, to protect against occupational exposure to chemicals, including health and safety risks, and to require notification or reporting of the storage, use and release of certain hazardous chemicals and substances. The extensive regulatory framework imposes compliance burdens and risks on us. Governmental authorities have the power to enforce compliance with these regulations and to obtain injunctions or impose civil and criminal fines in the case of violations.

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA”) imposes strict, joint and several liability on the present and former owners and operators of facilities that release hazardous substances into the environment. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (“RCRA”) regulates the generation, transportation, treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste. In New York State, the handling, storage and disposal of hazardous substances are governed by the Environmental Conservation Law, which contains the New York counterparts of CERCLA and RCRA. In addition, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, which requires employers to provide a place of employment that is free from recognized and preventable hazards that are likely to cause serious physical harm to employees, obligates employers to provide notice to employees regarding the presence of hazardous chemicals and to train employees in the use of such substances.

Our operations require the use of a limited amount of chemicals and other materials for painting and cleaning, including solvents and thinners, which are classified under applicable laws as hazardous chemicals and substances. We have obtained a permit from the Town of Islip, New York, Building Division in order to maintain a paint booth containing flammable liquids.

Federal Aviation Administration Regulation

We are subject to regulation by the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) under the provisions of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended. The FAA prescribes standards and licensing requirements for aircraft and aircraft components. We are subject to inspections by the FAA and may be subjected to fines and other penalties (including orders to cease production) for noncompliance with FAA regulations. Our failure to comply with applicable regulations could result in the termination of or our disqualification from some of our contracts, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

Government Contract Compliance

Our government contracts and sub-contracts are subject to the procurement rules and regulations of the U.S. Government. Many of the contract terms are dictated by these rules and regulations. Specifically, cost-based pricing is determined under the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”), which provide guidance on the types of costs that are allowable in establishing prices for goods and services under U.S. Government contracts. For example, costs such as those related to charitable contributions, advertising, interest expense, and public relations are unallowable, and therefore not recoverable through sales. During and after the fulfillment of a government contract, we may be audited in respect of the direct and allocated indirect costs attributed thereto. These audits may result in adjustments to our contract costs. Additionally, we may be subject to U.S. Government inquiries and investigations because of our participation in government procurement. Any inquiry or investigation can result in fines or limitations on our ability to continue to bid for government contracts and fulfill existing contracts. We believe that we are in compliance with all federal, state and local laws and regulations governing our operations and have obtained all material licenses and permits required for the operation of our business.

The U.S. Government generally has the ability to terminate our contracts, in whole or in part, without prior notice, for convenience or for default based on performance. If a U.S. Government contract were to be terminated for convenience, we generally would be protected by provisions covering reimbursement for costs incurred on the contract and profit on those costs, but not the anticipated profit that would have been earned had the contract been completed. In the unusual circumstance where a U.S. Government contract does not have such termination protection, we attempt to mitigate the termination risk through other means. Termination resulting from our default may expose us to liability and could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete for other contracts. The U.S. Government also has the ability to stop work under a contract for a limited period of time for its convenience. In the event of a stop work order, we generally would be protected by provisions covering reimbursement for costs incurred on the contract to date and for costs associated with the temporary stoppage of work on the contract. However, such temporary stoppages and delays could introduce inefficiencies for which we may not be able to negotiate full recovery from the U.S. Government, and could ultimately result in termination for convenience or reduced future orders on certain contracts. Additionally, we may be required to continue to perform for some period of time on certain of our U.S. Government contracts, even if the U.S. Government is unable to make timely payments.

Insurance

We maintain a $2 million general liability insurance policy, a $100 million products liability insurance policy, and a $5 million umbrella liability insurance policy. Additionally, we maintain a $10 million director and officers’ insurance policy. We believe this coverage is adequate for the types of products presently marketed because of the strict inspection standards imposed on us by our customers before they take possession of our products. Additionally, the FAR generally provide that we will not be held liable for any loss of or damage to property of the U.S. Government that occurs after the U.S. Government accepts delivery of our products and that results from any defects or deficiencies in our products unless the liability results from willful misconduct or lack of good faith on the part of our managerial personnel.

Proprietary Information

None of our current assembly processes or products is protected by patents. We rely on proprietary know-how and information and employ various methods to protect the processes, concepts, ideas and documentation associated with our products. These methods, however, may not afford complete protection and there can be no assurance that others will not independently develop such processes, concepts, ideas and documentation.

CPI Aero® is a registered trademark of the Company.

Employees

As of March 1, 2017, we had 259 full-time employees. We employ temporary personnel with specialized disciplines on an as-needed basis. None of our employees are members of a union. We believe that our relations with our employees are good.

Item 1A. RISK FACTORS

In addition to other risks and uncertainties described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the following material risk factors should be carefully considered in evaluating our business because such factors may have a significant impact on our business, operating results, liquidity and financial condition. As a result of the risk factors set forth below, actual results could differ materially from those projected in any forward-looking statements.

Risks related to our business

We depend on government contracts for a significant portion of our revenues.

We are a supplier, either directly or as a subcontractor, to the U.S. Government and its agencies. Government subcontracts accounted for 46% of our revenue in 2016, 58% of our revenue in 2015 and 5% of our revenue in 2014. In addition, 4% percent of revenue for 2016, 1% of revenue for 2015 and 2% of revenue for 2014 was derived from prime government contract sales. We depend on government contracts for a significant portion of our business. If we are suspended or barred from contracting with the U.S. Government, if our reputation or relationship with individual federal agencies were impaired, or if the U.S. Government otherwise ceased doing business with us or significantly decreased the amount of business it does with us, our business, prospects, financial condition and operating results would be materially adversely affected.

We face risks relating to government contracts.

The funding of U.S. Government programs is subject to congressional budget authorization and appropriation processes. For many programs, U.S. Congress appropriates funds on a fiscal year basis even though a program may extend over several fiscal years. Consequently, programs are often only partially funded initially and additional funds are committed only as Congress makes further appropriations. We cannot predict the extent to which total funding and/or funding for individual programs will be included, increased or reduced in budgets approved by Congress or be included in the scope of separate supplemental appropriations.  In the event that appropriations for any of our programs becomes unavailable, or is reduced or delayed, our contract or subcontract under such program may be terminated or adjusted by the U.S. Government, which could have a material adverse effect on our future sales under such program, and on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

We also cannot predict the impact of potential changes in priorities due to military transformation and planning and/or the nature of war-related activity on existing, follow-on or replacement programs. A shift of government priorities to programs in which we do not participate and/or reductions in funding for or the termination of programs in which we do participate, unless offset by other programs and opportunities, could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.

In addition, the U.S. Government generally has the ability to terminate contracts, in whole or in part, without prior notice, for convenience or for default based on performance. In the event of termination for the U.S. Government’s convenience, contractors are generally protected by provisions covering reimbursement for costs incurred on the contracts and profit on those costs but not the anticipated profit that would have been earned had the contract been completed. Termination by the U.S. Government of a contract for convenience could also result in the cancellation of future work on that program. Termination by the U.S. Government of a contract due to our default could require us to pay for re-procurement costs in excess of the original contract price, net of the value of work accepted from the original contract. Termination of a contract due to our default may expose us to liability and could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete for contracts.

We have risks associated with competing in the bidding process for contracts.

We obtain many of our contracts through a competitive bidding process. In the bidding process, we face the following risks:

We are subject to strict governmental regulations relating to the environment, which could result in fines and remediation expense in the event of non-compliance.

We are required to comply with extensive and frequently changing environmental regulations at the federal, state and local levels. Among other things, these regulatory bodies impose restrictions to control air, soil and water pollution, to protect against occupational exposure to chemicals, including health and safety risks, and to require notification or reporting of the storage, use and release of certain hazardous substances into the environment. This extensive regulatory framework imposes significant compliance burdens and risks on us. In addition, these regulations may impose liability for the cost of removal or remediation of certain hazardous substances released on or in our facilities without regard to whether we knew of, or caused, the release of such substances. Furthermore, we are required to provide a place of employment that is free from recognized and preventable hazards that are likely to cause serious physical harm to employees, provide notice to employees regarding the presence of hazardous chemicals and to train employees in the use of such substances. Our operations require the use of a limited amount of chemicals and other materials for painting and cleaning that are classified under applicable laws as hazardous chemicals and substances. If we are found not to be in compliance with any of these rules, regulations or permits, we may be subject to fines, remediation expenses and the obligation to change our business practice, any of which could result in substantial costs that would adversely impact our business operations and financial condition.

We may be subject to fines and disqualification for non-compliance with Federal Aviation Administration regulations.

We are subject to regulation by the FAA under the provisions of the Federal Aviation Act of 1958, as amended. The FAA prescribes standards and licensing requirements for aircraft and aircraft components. We are subject to inspections by the FAA and may be subjected to fines and other penalties (including orders to cease production) for noncompliance with FAA regulations. Our failure to comply with applicable regulations could result in the termination of or our disqualification from some of our contracts, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations and financial condition.

If our subcontractors or suppliers fail to perform their contractual obligations, our contract performance and our ability to obtain future business and our profitability could be materially and adversely impacted.

Most of our contracts involve subcontracts with other companies upon which we rely to perform a portion of the services that we must provide to our customers. There is a risk that we may have disputes with our subcontractors, including disputes regarding the quality and timeliness of work performed by the subcontractor, customer concerns about the subcontract, our failure to extend existing task orders or issue new task orders under a subcontract, or our hiring of personnel of a subcontractor. A failure by one or more of our subcontractors to satisfactorily provide on a timely basis the agreed-upon supplies or perform the agreed-upon services may materially and adversely impact our ability to perform our obligations as the prime contractor. Subcontractor performance deficiencies could result in a customer eliminating our ability to progress bill or terminating our contract for default. A prohibition on progress billing may have an adverse effect upon our cash flow and profitability and a default termination could expose us to liability and have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete for future contracts and orders. In addition, a delay in our ability to obtain components and equipment parts from our suppliers may affect our ability to meet our customers’ needs and may have a material adverse effect upon our profitability.

Due to fixed contract pricing, increasing contract costs exposes us to reduced profitability and the potential loss of future business.

Operating margin is adversely affected when contract costs that cannot be billed to customers are incurred.  This cost growth can occur if estimates to complete a contract increase due to technical challenges or if initial estimates used for calculating the contract price were incorrect.  The cost estimation process requires significant judgment and expertise. Reasons for cost growth may include unavailability and productivity of labor, the nature and complexity of the work to be performed, the effect of change orders, the availability of materials, the effect of any delays in performance, availability and timing of funding from the customer, natural disasters, and the inability to recover any claims included in the estimates to complete.  A significant increase in cost estimates on one or more programs could have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

We use estimates when accounting for contracts. Changes in estimates could affect our profitability and our overall financial position.

We primarily recognize revenue from our contracts over the contractual period under the percentage-of-completion (POC) method of accounting. Under the POC method of accounting, sales and gross profit are recognized as work is performed based on the relationship between actual costs incurred and total estimated costs at the completion of the contract. Recognized revenues that will not be billed under the terms of the contract until a later date are recorded on our balance sheet as an asset captioned “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts.” Contracts where billings to date have exceeded recognized revenues are recorded on our balance sheet as a liability captioned “Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts.” Changes to the original estimates may be required during the life of the contract. Estimates are reviewed monthly and the effect of any change in the estimated gross margin percentage for a contract is reflected in the financial statements in the period the change becomes known. The use of the POC method of accounting involves considerable use of estimates in determining revenues and profits and in assigning the amounts to accounting periods. As a result, there can be a significant disparity between earnings (both for accounting and taxes) as reported and actual cash received by us during any reporting period. We continually evaluate all of the issues related to the assumptions, risks and uncertainties inherent with the application of the POC method of accounting; however, there is no assurance that our estimates will be accurate. If our estimates are not accurate or a contract is terminated, we will be forced to adjust revenue in later periods. Furthermore, even if our estimates are accurate, we may have a shortfall in our cash flow and we may need to borrow money to pay for costs until the reported earnings materialize to actual cash receipts.

If the contracts associated with our backlog were terminated, our financial condition would be adversely affected.

The maximum contract value specified under each contract that we enter into is not necessarily indicative of the revenues that we will realize under that contract. Because we may not receive the full amount we expect under a contract, we may not accurately estimate our backlog because the earnings of revenues on programs included in backlog may never occur or may change. Cancellations of pending contracts or terminations or reductions of contracts in progress could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations. As of December 31, 2016, our backlog was approximately $416 million, of which 23% was funded and 77% was unfunded.

We may be unable to attract and retain personnel who are key to our operations.

Our success, among other things, is dependent on our ability to attract and retain highly qualified senior officers and engineers. Competition for key personnel is intense. Our ability to attract and retain senior officers and experienced, top rate engineers is dependent on a number of factors, including prevailing market conditions and compensation packages offered by companies competing for the same talent. The inability to hire and retain these persons may adversely affect our production operations and other aspects of our business.

We are subject to the cyclical nature of the commercial aerospace industry, and any future downturn in the commercial aerospace industry or general economic conditions could adversely impact the demand for our products.

Our business may be affected by certain characteristics and trends of the commercial aerospace industry or general economic conditions that affect our customers, such as fluctuations in the aerospace industry’s business cycle, varying fuel and labor costs, intense price competition and regulatory scrutiny, certain trends, including a possible decrease in aviation activity and a decrease in outsourcing by aircraft manufacturers or the failure of projected market growth to materialize or continue.  In the event that these characteristics and trends adversely affect customers in the commercial aerospace industry, they may reduce the overall demand for our products.

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

Our management determined that as of December 31, 2015, our internal controls over financial reporting were not effective based on the criteria created by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) set forth in Internal Control – Integrated Framework (2013).

Because of the material weakness identified in our internal controls over financial reporting, our management was unable to report favorably as to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and/or our disclosure controls and procedures, and we therefore implemented measures in 2016 and remediated the material weakness. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. If we identify material weaknesses, such remedial measures could be expensive and time consuming and could potentially cause investors to lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, which could have an adverse effect on our stock price and potentially subject us to litigation. For more information see, “Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting”

We incur risk associated with new programs

New programs with new technologies typically carry risks associated with design changes, development of new production tools, increased capital and funding commitments, ability to meet customer specifications, delivery schedules and unique contractual requirements, supplier performance, ability of the customer to meet its contractual obligations to us, and our ability to accurately estimate costs associated with such programs. In addition, any new program may not generate sufficient demand or may experience technological problems or significant delays in the regulatory or other certification or manufacturing and delivery schedule. If we were unable to perform our obligations under new programs to the customer’s satisfaction, if we were unable to manufacture products at our estimated costs, or if a new program in which we had made a significant investment was terminated or experienced weak demand, delays or technological problems, then our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. This risk includes the potential for default, quality problems, or inability to meet specifications, as well as our inability to negotiate final pricing for program changes, and could result in low margin or forward loss contracts, and the risk of having to write-off costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts if it were deemed to be unrecoverable over the life of the program. In addition, beginning new work on existing programs also carries risk associated with the transfer of technology, knowledge and tooling.

In order to perform on new programs we may be required to expend up-front costs which may not have been negotiated in our selling price. Additionally, we may have made margin assumptions related to those costs, that in the case of significant program delays and/or program cancellations, or if we are not successful in negotiating favorable margin on scope changes, could cause us to bear impairment charges which may be material, for costs that are not recoverable. Such charges and the loss of up-front costs could have a material adverse impact on our liquidity.

We are presently classified as a small business and the loss of our small business status may adversely affect our ability to compete for government contracts.

We are presently classified as a small business under certain of the codes under the North American Industry Classification Systems (“NAICS”) industry and product specific codes which are regulated in the United States by the Small Business Administration. We are not considered a small business under all NAICS codes. While we do not presently derive a substantial portion of our business from contracts which are set-aside for small businesses, we are able to bid on small business set-aside contracts as well as contracts which are open to non-small business entities. As the NAICS codes are periodically revised, it is possible that we may lose our status as a small business. The loss of small business status would adversely impact our eligibility for special small business programs and limit our ability to partner with other business entities which are seeking to team with small business entities as may be required under a specific contract.

Cyber security attacks, internal system or service failures may adversely impact our business and operations.

Any system or service disruptions, including those caused by projects to improve our information technology systems, if not anticipated and appropriately mitigated, could disrupt our business and impair our ability to effectively provide products and related services to our customers and could have a material adverse effect on our business. We could also be subject to systems failures, including network, software or hardware failures, whether caused by us, third-party service providers, intruders or hackers, computer viruses, natural disasters, power shortages or terrorist attacks. Cyber security threats are evolving and include, but are not limited to, malicious software, unauthorized attempts to gain access to sensitive, confidential or otherwise protected information related to us or our products, customers or suppliers, or other acts that could lead to disruptions in our business. Any such failures could cause loss of data and interruptions or delays in our business, cause us to incur remediation costs or subject us to claims and damage our reputation. In addition, the failure or disruption of our communications or utilities could cause us to interrupt or suspend our operations or otherwise adversely affect our business. Although we utilize various procedures and controls to monitor and mitigate the risk of these threats, there can be no assurance that these procedures and controls will be sufficient. Our property and business interruption insurance may be inadequate to compensate us for all losses that may occur as a result of any system or operational failure or disruption which would adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, expenditures incurred in implementing cyber security and other procedures and controls could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

None.

CPI Aero’s executive offices and production facilities are situated in an approximately 171,000 square foot building located at 91 Heartland Blvd., Edgewood, New York 11717. CPI Aero occupies this facility under a ten-year lease that commenced in June 2011. The current monthly base rent is $136,615, including real estate taxes.

None.

Not applicable.

PART II

Market Information

Our common shares are listed on the NYSE MKT under the symbol CVU. The following table sets forth for 2016 and 2015, the high and low sales prices of our common shares for the periods indicated, as reported by the NYSE MKT.

On March 1, 2017, the closing sale price for our common shares on the NYSE MKT was $7.65. On March 1, 2017, there were 205 holders of record of our common shares and, we believe, over 2,200 beneficial owners of our common shares.

Dividend Policy

To date, we have not paid any dividends on our common shares. Any payment of dividends in the future is within the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on our earnings, if any, our capital requirements and financial condition and other relevant factors. Our board of directors does not intend to declare any cash or other dividends in the foreseeable future, but intends instead to retain earnings, if any, for use in our business operations.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities, Use of Proceeds from Registered Securities

There have been no sales of unregistered sales of our equity securities for the three months ended December 31, 2016.  The have been no repurchases of our outstanding common stock during the three months ended December 31, 2016.

Equity Compensation Plan Information

The following table sets forth certain information at December 31, 2016 with respect to our equity compensation plans that provide for the issuance of options, warrants or rights to purchase our securities.

ITEM 6. Selected Financial Data

The following table sets forth our financial data as of the dates and for the periods indicated. The data has been derived from our audited financial statements. The selected financial data should be read in conjunction with our audited financial statements and MDA. Our results of operations for 2016 and 2014 were materially affected by the change in estimate described in MDA.

Item 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Forward-Looking Statements

When used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in future filings by us with the Securities and Exchange Commission, the words or phrases “will likely result,” “management expects” or “we expect,” “will continue,” “is anticipated,” “estimated” or similar expressions are intended to identify “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any such forward-looking statements, each of which speaks only as of the date made. Such statements are subject to certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from historical earnings and those presently anticipated or projected. The risks are included in “Item 1A: Risk Factors” and “Item 7: Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We have no obligation to publicly release the result of any revisions, which may be made to any forward-looking statements to reflect anticipated or unanticipated events or circumstances occurring after the date of such statements.

You should read the financial information set forth below in conjunction with our financial statements and notes thereto.

Business Operations

We are engaged in the contract production of structural aircraft parts for fixed wing aircraft and helicopters in both the commercial and defense markets. We have also recently expanded our presence in the aerosystems segment of the market, with our production of various reconnaissance pod structures and fuel panel systems. Within the global aerostructure and aerosystem supply chain, we are either a Tier 1 supplier to aircraft OEMs or a Tier 2 subcontractor to major Tier 1 manufacturers. We also are a prime contractor to the U.S. Department of Defense, primarily the U.S. Air Force. In conjunction with our assembly operations, we provide engineering, program management, supply chain management and kitting, and MRO services.

Critical Accounting Policies

Revenue Recognition

We primarily recognize revenue from our contracts over the contractual period under the percentage-of-completion (“POC”) method of accounting. Under the POC method of accounting, revenue and gross profit are recognized as work is performed based on the relationship between actual costs incurred and total estimated costs at the completion of the contract. Recognized revenues that will not be billed under the terms of the contract until a later date are recorded as an asset captioned “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts.” Contracts where billings to date have exceeded recognized revenues are recorded as a liability captioned “Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts.” Changes to the original estimates may be required during the life of the contract. Estimates are reviewed monthly and the effect of any change in the estimated gross margin percentage for a contract is reflected in the financial statements in the period the change becomes known. The use of the POC method of accounting involves considerable use of estimates in determining revenues and profits and in assigning the amounts to accounting periods. As a result, there can be a significant disparity between earnings (both for accounting and taxes) as reported and actual cash received by us during any reporting period. We continually evaluate all of the issues related to the assumptions, risks and uncertainties inherent with the application of the POC method of accounting; however, we cannot assure you that our estimates will be accurate. If our estimates are not accurate or a contract is terminated, we will be forced to adjust revenue in later periods. Furthermore, even if our estimates are accurate, we may have a shortfall in our cash flow and we may need to borrow money to pay for costs until the reported earnings materialize to actual cash receipts.

When adjustments are required for the estimated total revenue on a contract, these changes are recognized with an inception-to-date effect in the current period. Also, when estimates of total costs to be incurred exceed estimates of total revenue to be earned, a provision for the entire loss on the contract is recorded in the period in which the loss is determined.

Results of Operations

Non-GAAP Financial Measures

We prepare and publicly release audited financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. We also are disclose and discuss certain non-GAAP financial measures in our public releases. The non-GAAP financial measures that we disclose are adjusted earnings (arrived at by eliminating the Company’s A-10 Program with Boeing from reported results). Adjusted earnings is a key metric that we have used in evaluating our financial performance. Adjusted earnings is considered a non-GAAP financial measure as defined by Regulation G promulgated by the SEC under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended. We consider adjusted earnings important in evaluating our financial performance on a consistent basis across various periods. Due to the significance of the non-cash and non-recurring change in estimate recognized in the year ended December 31, 2016, adjusted earnings enables the Company’s Board of Directors and management to monitor and evaluate the business on a consistent basis. We use adjusted earnings as a measure, among others, to analyze and evaluate financial and strategic planning decisions regarding future operating decisions and investments. The presentation of adjusted earnings should not be construed as an inference that the Company’s future results will be unaffected by unusual or non-recurring items or by non-cash items, such as changes in estimates. This non-GAAP measure should be considered in addition to, rather than as a substitute for, pre-tax income, net income and cash flows from operating activities.

In June 2014, the Company concluded that the long term future of the A-10 was uncertain when the U.S. Department of Defense released its 2015 Budget Request that called for the retirement of the entire A-10 fleet. In addition, the Company estimated that the A-10 program would be terminated prior to the completion of the Company’s orders, which was through ship set 173 instead of the expected 242 ship sets that the contract initially permitted. At that time the Company recorded a change in estimate which reduced the estimated revenue on the program to about 41% of the original estimate. The adjustment aggregated approximately $47.7 million.

From June 2014 through December 2015 the Company revised estimates, based on the best available information each quarter, to properly account for the program. The Company’s estimate in March 2015 assumed that the program would be canceled at approximately 135 ship sets. In addition to revenue earned based on parts shipped, the Company would be entitled to compensation upon early termination of the program (“Termination Liability”) for certain costs incurred. The amount of Termination Liability varies based on exactly when the program is canceled and the amount of costs incurred through the date of termination. In June and September 2015, the Company estimated costs based on the best information available at each period and made adjustments as needed, including deferring certain costs based on the Termination Liability.

During the three months ended March 31, 2016, and prior to the filing of the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company had information that the USAF was intending to increase the number of ship sets on order for the A-10. Because of the expectation that the USAF would increase its orders, the Company projected that its current order of A-l0 parts would not be cancelled before ship set 173. An increase in the number of ship sets on order would improve the Company’s estimated gross margin on the overall program. In the December 31, 2015 financial statements the Company did not alter gross margin of the program for this potential order, as the Company couldn’t determine if the realization of the new order was probable and that the improved margin would be realized.

In April 2016, the Company became aware that the USAF had reevaluated its position and as such had deferred any decision regarding increasing the orders on the A-10 program. These changes in position by the USAF were supported by communications from Boeing, the Company’s customer.

Based on the above facts, the Company believes that, it is not probable that there will be any future orders on the A-10 beyond the 173 currently on order. As a result of the information that management became aware of in April 2016, for the quarter ended March 31, 2016 the Company estimated that the A-10 program would run through the conclusion of its current purchase order with Boeing at ship set number 173. There is no justification for the deferral of any expenses incurred or expected to be incurred related to the contract under POC or any authoritative guidance in GAAP, nor is there any justification of increasing estimated revenue on the program as the recovery of such amounts is not deemed probable. The change in estimate resulted in a reduction of revenue of approximately $8.9 million in the quarter ended March 31, 2016.

Year Ended December 31, 2016 as Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2015

Revenue. Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $81,329,858 compared to $100,202,557 for the same period last year, representing a decrease of $18,872,699.

Overall, revenue generated from prime government contracts for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $3,493,343 compared to $892,752 for the year ended December 31, 2015, an increase of $2,600,591. This increase is a result of our deliveries on our F-16 contract, that began in 2016.

Revenue generated from government subcontracts for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $37,355,447 compared to $56,982,785 for the year ended December 31, 2015, a decrease of $19,627,338. This decrease is the result of many factors including: a $13.4 million decrease in revenue on the Company’s A-10 program with Boeing because of a change in estimate on the program, as previously described, a $5.6 million decrease in revenue from the Company’s E-2D program with NGC, due to the timing of work related to the multiyear order received in 2014, a $1.0 million decrease in revenue from the Company’s gunner window program with Sikorsky, due to lower orders and a $1.3 million decrease in revenue from the Company’s fuel panel program with Sikorsky, due to lower orders. These decreases were offset by a $4.8 million increase in the Company’s E-2D wet outer wing program, which had only nominal activity in 2015 and was in production in 2016.

Revenue generated from commercial contracts was $40,481,068 for the year ended December 31, 2016 compared to $42,327,020 for the year ended December 31, 2015, a decrease of $1,845,952 or 4.4%. This decrease is predominately the result of a $3.9 million decrease in the Company’s Cessna program, as we completed production on our outstanding order, a $1.3 million decrease in the Company’s Embraer program, as Embraer cut back on delivery requirements in the fourth quarter of 2016, a $800,000 decrease in revenue on the Company’s Honda program, as we near completion of the flap and vane portion of this program and a $2.8 million decrease in revenue from various Sikorsky commercial programs, the result of lower demand. These decreases were offset by a $6.5 million increase in revenue from the Company’s G650 program.

During the year ended December 31, 2016, we received approximately $36.5 million of new contract awards, which included $6.3 million of government prime contract awards, approximately $10.4 million of government subcontract awards and approximately $19.8 million of commercial contract awards, compared to $61.6 million of new contract awards in 2015, which included $13.3 million in government prime contract awards, $14.1 million of government subcontract awards and $34.2 million of commercial contract awards. 

Cost of sales

Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 was $77,010,940 and $83,600,854, respectively, a decrease of $6,589,914 or 7.9%.

The components of cost of sales were as follows:

Procurement for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $52,504,318 compared to $57,473,129, a decrease of $4,968,811 or 8.6%. The decrease in procurement was the result of lower procurement on the Company’s E-2D program, as we did multiyear volume discounted buys in 2015.

Labor costs for the year ended December 31, 2016 were $8,112,981 compared to $9,188,417, a decrease of $1,075,436 or 11.7%. This decrease is predominately due to decreases in labor on our A-10 program, as we near completion on some of the assemblies from that program, as well as a decrease in labor on the Company’s Cessna Citation program, as we completed the assemblies on order on that program.

Factory overhead for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $15,750,146 compared to $16,431,764, a decrease of $681,618 or 4.2%. This decrease is the result of a decrease in employee benefits, factory supplies and indirect salaries, as shop production has declined.

Gross profit. Gross profit for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $4,318,918 compared to $16,601,703 for the year ended December 31, 2015, a decrease of $12,282,785. Gross profit percentage (“gross margin”) for the year ended December 31, 2016 was 5.3% compared to 16.6% for the same period last year, predominately the result of the change in estimate on the Company’s A-10 program.

Favorable/Unfavorable Adjustments to Gross Profit

During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, circumstances required that we make changes in estimates to various contracts. Such changes in estimates resulted in decreases in total gross profit as follows:

During the year ended December 31, 2016 we had one contract which had an approximately $270,000 unfavorable adjustment caused by excess labor and procurement costs due to difficulty in the manufacturing process. In addition, we had an approximate $354,000 unfavorable adjustment on one contract that was canceled by the government. Also, we had 4 contracts that each had between $140,000 and $245,000 (cumulatively $890,000) of unfavorable adjustments caused by excess labor costs incurred. No other individual favorable or unfavorable changes in estimates for the year ended December 31, 2016 were material.

For the year ended December 31, 2015, we had one contract on which we have experienced technical issues, which resulted in excess engineering time and additional procurement costs that caused an unfavorable adjustment of approximately $1,434,000. Additionally there was one contract that was running over the budgeted labor, which caused an unfavorable adjustment of approximately $758,000. No other individual favorable or unfavorable changes in estimates for the year ended December 31, 2015 were material. Additionally, on one contract we had significant engineering changes, which resulted in excess labor and procurement costs that caused an unfavorable adjustment of approximately $3,000,000.

For the year ended December 31, 2014, approximately $39,915,000 of the unfavorable adjustment was the result of the changes in estimates on the Company’s A-10 WRP described earlier. In addition, the Company has one contract that has had shipping dates extended a number of times. As a result, labor and procurement costs have changed since the initial contract estimate, which resulted in an unfavorable adjustment of approximately $693,000. The Company also has one contract on which we have experienced technical issues, which resulted in excess engineering time that caused an unfavorable adjustment of approximately $599,000. Also, the Company has one multi-year contract that has experienced procurement price increases that has caused an unfavorable adjustment of approximately $555,000. No other individual favorable or unfavorable changes in estimates for the year ended December 31, 2014 were material.

Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2016 were $8,614,190 compared to $7,636,148 for the year ended December 31, 2015, an increase of $978,042, or 12.8%. This increase was primarily due to an approximately a $460,000 increase in accounting and legal fees related mostly to the extended 2015 audit process and an executive compensation study, a $411,000 reserve for disputed account receivables with various customers and an increase of $355,000 in salaries.

Interest expense. Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $1,356,646, compared to $918,129 for 2015, an increase of $438,517 or 47.8%. The increase in interest expense is the result of an increase in the average amount of outstanding debt during 2016 as compared to 2015.

Income (loss) from operations. We had loss from operations for the year ended December 31, 2016 of $4,295,272 compared to income from operations of $8,965,555 for the year ended December 31, 2015.

Provision for (benefit from) income taxes. Our historic effective tax rate has been between 30%-32% of taxable income. The rate has been below the statutory federal income tax rate of 34% because of our ability to utilize the domestic production activity deduction, available to companies that do manufacturing within the United States. Beginning in 2015, we are providing for state income taxes in states where, although we don’t have any property or full time employees, the historic method for the allocation of state income taxes, we do have sales and have employees present on at least a part-time basis. As such the effective tax rate for both 2016 and 2015 is approximately 37%.

Adjusted Earnings

On an as adjusted basis, which excludes the impact of the A-10 program on the Company’s financial performance for all periods presented, revenue for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $81.8 million compared with $86.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. Gross profit was $19.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 compared to $19.6 million year ended December 31, 2015. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $6.1 million or $0.71 per diluted share compared with $6.9 million or $0.81 per diluted share in the year ended December 31, 2015.

Year Ended December 31, 2015 as Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2014

Revenue. Revenue for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $100,202,557 compared to $39,687,010 for the same period last year, representing an increase of $60,515,547.

Overall, revenue generated from prime government contracts for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $892,752 compared to $778,175 for the year ended December 31, 2014, an increase of $114,577 or 14.7%.

Revenue generated from government subcontracts for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $56,982,785 compared to $2,059,029 for the year ended December 31, 2014, an increase of $54,923,756. Because of the change in estimate on our Wing Replacement Program for the U.S. Air Force’s A-10 Thunderbolt aircraft (“WRP”) described below, our 2014 revenue from government subcontracts was unusually low, which resulted in the increase in revenue for 2015 as compared to 2014.

Revenue generated from commercial contracts was $42,327,020 for the year ended December 31, 2015 compared to $36,849,806 for the year ended December 31, 2014, an increase of $5,477,214 or 14.9%. This increase is the result of an approximate $2.8 million increase in revenue on our Embraer Phenom 300 program and an approximate $5.1 million increase in our Honda program. These programs have progressed out of the low rate early stage into a more normal production phase. These increases were offset by small decreases in our G650 program and our Sikorsky S-92 programs.

During the year ended December 31, 2015, we received approximately $61.6 million of new contract awards, which included $13.3 million of government prime contract awards, approximately $14.1 million of government subcontract awards and approximately $34.2 million of commercial contract awards, compared to $92.9 million of new contract awards in 2014, which included $0.5 million in government prime contract awards, $67.1 million of government subcontract awards and $25.3 million of commercial contract awards. In September of last year we received a $65 million multi-year contract modification adding four additional years’ worth of E-2/C-2 wing kits.  This amount was entirely included in new contract awards for the 2014 period.  This means we will no longer receive annual purchase orders for our largest program as has been the case historically, making the comparison to last year less informative. 

Cost of sales

Cost of sales for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 was $83,600,854 and $69,411,709, respectively, an increase of $14,189,145 or 20.4%.

The components of the cost of sales were as follows:

Procurement for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $57,473,129 compared to $45,106,460, an increase of $12,366,669 or 27.4%. The increase in procurement was the result of increased procurement on the Company’s E-2D program, as we ramp up to support our recently won multi-year contract.

Labor costs for the year ended December 31, 2015 were $9,188,417 compared to $8,558,125, an increase of $630,292 or 7.4%. This increase is due to more direct touch employees needed to support increased delivery volume in 2015 compared to 2014, specifically on our Embraer and Honda programs.

Factory overhead for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $16,431,764 compared to $15,350,942, an increase of $1,080,822 or 7.0%. This increase is the result of an increase of approximately $1,002,645 for employee benefits, predominantly increasing insurance rates, offset by decreases in indirect labor of $337,322 as we continue to improve the efficiency of our workforce.

Gross profit/loss. Gross profit/loss for the year ended December 31, 2015 was a profit of $16,601,703 compared to a loss of $29,724,699 for the year ended December 31, 2014, an increase of $46,326,402. Gross profit/loss percentage (“gross margin”) for the year ended December 31, 2015 was 16.6% compared to (74.9%) for the same period last year. The swing in gross margin from a profit to a loss is the result of the change in estimate on the A-10 program described above.

Selling, general and administrative expenses. Selling, general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2015 were $7,636,148 compared to $7,308,220 for the year ended December 31, 2014, an increase of $327,928, or 4.5%. This increase was primarily due to an approximately a $70,000 increase in accrued bonuses, the result of officers not earning a bonus in 2014 because of our net loss, a $90,000 increase in Board of Directors’ fees, which was the result of having 6 outside directors on our board of directors for all of 2015, an $88,000 increase in marketing and advertising expenses and a $78,000 increase in computer expenses, resulting from increased computer licensing costs associated with our larger staff.

Interest expense. Interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2015 was $918,129, compared to $794,428 for 2014, an increase of $123,701 or 15.6%. The increase in interest expense is the result of an increase in the average amount of outstanding debt during 2015 as compared to 2014.

Income (loss) from operations. We had income from operations for the year ended December 31, 2015 of $8,965,555 compared to a loss from operations of $37,032,919 for the year ended December 31, 2014 resulting predominantly from the A-10 change in estimate.

Provision for (benefit from) income taxes. Our historic effective tax rate has been between 30%-32% of taxable income. The rate has been below the statutory federal income tax rate of 34% because of our ability to utilize the domestic production activity deduction, available to companies that do manufacturing within the United States. Beginning in 2015, we are providing for state income taxes in states where, although we don’t have any property or full time employees, the historic method for the allocation of state income taxes, we do have sales and have employees present on at least a part time basis. As such the effective tax rate for 2015 is approximately 37%. We expect that future tax rates will approximate the 2015 effective tax rate.

Business Outlook

The statements in the “Business Outlook” section and other forward-looking statements of this Annual Report on Form 10-K are subject to revision during the course of the year in our quarterly earnings releases and SEC filings and at other times.

Liquidity and Capital Resources

General. At December 31, 2016, we had working capital of $70,595,485 compared to $67,292,917 at December 31, 2015, an increase of $3,302,568, or 4.9%.

Cash Flow. A large portion of our cash is used to pay for materials and processing costs associated with contracts that are in process and which do not provide for progress payments. Costs for which we are not able to bill on a progress basis are components of CEE on our balance sheet and represent the aggregate costs and related earnings for uncompleted contracts for which the customer has not yet been billed. These costs and earnings are recovered upon shipment of products and presentation of billings in accordance with contract terms.

Because the POC method of accounting requires us to use estimates in determining revenues, costs and profits and in assigning the amounts to accounting periods, there can be a significant disparity between earnings (both for accounting and tax purposes) as reported and actual cash that we receive during any reporting period. Accordingly, it is possible that we may have a shortfall in our cash flow and may need to borrow money until the reported earnings materialize into actual cash receipts.

In order to perform on new programs, we may be required to expend up-front costs that may have to be amortized over a portion of production units.  In the case of significant program delays and/or program cancellations, we could be required to bear impairment charges, which may be material for costs that are not recoverable.  Such charges and the loss of up-front costs could have a material impact on our liquidity and results of operations.

We continue to work to obtain better payment terms with our customers, including accelerated progress payment arrangements, as well as exploring alternative funding sources.

At December 31, 2016, our cash balance was $1,039,586 compared to $1,002,023 at December 31, 2015, an increase of $37,563. Our accounts receivable balance at December 31, 2016 increased to $8,514,613 from $7,665,837 at December 31, 2015.

Bank Credit Facilities.

On December 5, 2012, the Company entered into an Amended and Restated Credit Agreement with Santander Bank (“Restated Agreement”) as the sole arranger, administrative agent, collateral agent and lender and Valley National Bank as lender. The Restated Agreement provided for a revolving credit facility of $35 million (the “Revolving Facility”). The Revolving Facility and term loan under the Restated Agreement are secured by all of our assets.

On March 9, 2012, the Company obtained a $4.5 million term loan from Santander Bank to be amortized over five years (the “Santander Term Loan”). The Santander Term Loan was used by the Company to purchase tooling and equipment for new programs. The Santander Term Loan was continued under the Restated Agreement, and was payable in monthly installments of $75,000, with a final payment of the remaining principal balance on March 9, 2017. The Santander Term Loan bore interest at the lower of LIBOR plus 3% or Santander Bank’s prime rate. The Santander Term Loan was subject to the amended and restated terms and conditions of the Restated Agreement.

In connection with the Santander Term Loan, the Company and Santander Bank entered into a five-year interest rate swap agreement, in the notional amount of $4.5 million. Under the interest rate swap, the Company paid an amount to Santander Bank representing interest on the notional amount at 4.11% and received an amount from Sovereign representing interest on the notional amount at a rate equal to the one-month LIBOR plus 3%. The effect of this interest rate swap was that the Company paid a fixed interest rate of 4.11% over the term of the Santander Term Loan.

On March 24, 2016, the Company entered into a Credit Agreement with Bank United, N.A. as the sole arranger, administrative agent and collateral agent (the “BankUnited Facility”). The BankUnited Facility provides for a revolving credit loan commitment of $30 million and a $10 million term loan.  The proceeds of the BankUnited Facility were used to pay off all amounts outstanding under the Santander Term Loan and the Revolving Facility.  The term of the BankUnited Facility is through March of 2019. The revolving loan bears interest at a rate based upon a pricing grid, as defined in the agreement.  The range for LIBOR based loans is between 2.5% and 3.25% above the then applicable LIBOR rate.  The range of base rate loans is between the bank’s prime rate and 0.75% above the bank’s prime rate.

In connection with the BankUnited Facility, the Company terminated the Santander interest swap agreement.

On May 9, 2016, the Company entered into an amendment (the “Amendment”) to the BankUnited Facility. The Amendment changes the definition of EBITDA for the Leverage Coverage Ratio Covenant for the remainder of 2016 and changes the maximum leverage ratio to 3 to 1 to 3.5 to 1 for the quarters ending June 30, 2016 and September 30, 2016. Also, the Amendment increased the interest rate on the BankUnited Facility by 50 basis points and requires the repayment of a portion of the Term Loan in and to the extent that the Company receives any contract reimbursement payments from its current Request for Equitable Adjustment with Boeing on the A-10 program.

Also, in May 2016, the Company and BankUnited entered into a new interest rate swap with the objective of reducing our exposure to cash flow volatility arising from interest rate fluctuations associated with certain debt. The notional amount, maturity date, and currency of this contract match those of the underlying debt.

As of December 31, 2016, the Company was in compliance with all of the covenants contained in the Restated Agreement, as amended.

As of December 31, 2016, the Company had $22.4 million outstanding under the BankUnited Facility and as of December 31, 2015, the Company had $23.7 million outstanding under the Santander Revolving Facility.

We believe that our existing resources, together with the availability under our credit facility, will be sufficient to meet our current working capital needs for at least the next 12 months.

Contractual Obligations. The table below summarizes information about our contractual obligations as of December 31, 2016 and the effects these obligations are expected to have on our liquidity and cash flow in the future years.

Inflation. Inflation historically has not had a material effect on our operations.

Management does not believe that there is any material market risk exposure with respect to derivative or other financial instruments that would require disclosure under this item.

This information appears following Item 15 of this Report and is incorporated herein by reference.

None.

Item 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

We maintain a system of disclosure controls and procedures that is designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms, and that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosures. Disclosure controls and procedures also include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by a company in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the company’s management, including its principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing similar functions, and Board of Directors, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.

Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) as of December 31, 2016. Based on this evaluation, they have concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report are effective in timely providing them with material information relating to the Company required to be disclosed in the reports the Company files or submits under the Exchange Act.

There were no material changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2016 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

The report called for by Item 308(a) of Regulation S-K is included herein as “Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting.”

The attestation report called for by Item 308(b) of Registration S-K is included herein as “Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm”.

Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting 

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.  Internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f), is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by our 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 generally accepted accounting principles and includes those policies and procedures that:

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.  All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations. Therefore, even those systems determined to be effective can provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation and presentation.

Management conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting based on criteria established in Internal Control- Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) and anticipates to continue to use this criteria in the future. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2016.

As we reported in our annual report on form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, as a result of the material weakness described below, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2015.

A material weakness is a control deficiency or combination of control deficiencies that results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. The following material weakness was identified as of December 31, 2015: due to an ongoing negotiation with one customer, the Company submitted a request for equitable adjustment (“REA”) on a contract, as allowed under the contract. During the fourth quarter of 2015, the Company initially concluded that it had sufficient documentation to recognize revenue based upon the REA. After further evaluation, management concluded that it did not have sufficient documentation to record such revenue and therefore its review controls over this REA were not adequate. During 2016 management implemented practices and procedures to address the foregoing material weakness, including more timely reviews of infrequently occurring transactions, such as an REA. Additionally, the Company increased the size and technical expertise of its accounting staff to evaluate all complex transactions on a more timely basis. As a result of these actions we have remediated the material weakness identified at December 31, 2015.

 Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

There were no changes in our internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2016, that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, out internal control over financial reporting.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
CPI Aerostructures, Inc.

We have audited CPI Aerostructures, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). CPI Aerostructures, Inc.’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audit also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, CPI Aerostructures, Inc. has maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the balance sheets as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016, of CPI Aerostructures, Inc. and our report dated March 8, 2017 expressed an unqualified opinion.

/s/ CohnReznick LLP

Jericho, New York

March 8, 2017

Item 9B. OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III 

See Item 14.

See Item 14.

See Item 14.

See Item 14.

The information required by Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 will be contained in our definitive proxy statement for our 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after the end of our fiscal year covered by this report pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Exchange Act, and incorporated herein by reference.

PART IV

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
CPI Aerostructures, Inc.

We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of CPI Aerostructures, Inc. as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related statements of operations and comprehensive income (loss), shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016. CPI Aerostructures, Inc.’s management is responsible for these financial statements. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of CPI Aerostructures, Inc. as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), CPI Aerostructures, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated March 8, 2017, expressed an unqualified opinion.

/s/ CohnReznick LLP

Jericho, New York

March 8, 2017

CPI AEROSTRUCTURES, INC.