NL INDUSTRIES INC - Quarter Report: 2008 June (Form 10-Q)
SECURITIES
AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
|
|
Washington,
D.C. 20549
|
|
FORM
10-Q
|
|
QUARTERLY
REPORT UNDER SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
|
|
THE
SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
|
|
For
the quarter ended June 30,
2008
|
|
Commission
file number 1-640
|
|
NL INDUSTRIES, INC.
|
|
(Exact
name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
New Jersey
|
13-5267260
|
(State
or other jurisdiction of
incorporation
or organization)
|
(IRS
Employer Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
|
5430
LBJ Freeway, Suite 1700
|
|
Dallas,
Texas 75240-2697
|
|
(Address
of principal executive offices)
|
|
|
|
Registrant's
telephone number, including area
code: (972) 233-1700
|
|
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 X No
Indicate
by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an
accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company (as
defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934). Large
accelerated filer Accelerated
filer X
Non-accelerated filer
Smaller reporting company
Indicate
by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule
12b-2 of the Act). Yes No
X
Number
of shares of the Registrant's common stock outstanding on July 31, 2008:
48,598,634.
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
INDEX
Page
|
||
number
|
||
Part
I.
|
FINANCIAL
INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1.
|
Financial
Statements
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Balance Sheets -
|
||
December
31, 2007; June 30, 2008 (unaudited)
|
3
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Operations (unaudited)-
|
||
Three
and six months ended June 30, 2007 and 2008
|
5
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders' Equity
|
||
and
Comprehensive Income -
|
||
Six
months ended June 30, 2008 (unaudited)
|
6
|
|
Condensed
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (unaudited) -
|
||
Six
months ended June 30, 2007 and 2008
|
7
|
|
Notes
to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements
|
||
(unaudited)
|
9
|
|
Item
2.
|
Management's
Discussion and Analysis of Financial
|
|
Condition
and Results of Operations
|
21
|
|
Item
3.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk
|
34
|
Item
4.
|
Controls
and Procedures
|
34
|
Part
II.
|
OTHER
INFORMATION
|
|
Item
1.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
36
|
Item
1A.
|
Risk
Factors
|
37
|
Item
4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
37
|
Item
6.
|
Exhibits
|
38
|
Items
2, 3 and 5 of Part II are omitted because there is no information to
report
|
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In
thousands)
ASSETS
|
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||
Current
assets:
|
||||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents
|
$ | 41,112 | $ | 30,849 | ||||
Restricted
cash and cash equivalents
|
4,970 | 9,794 | ||||||
Marketable
securities
|
5,860 | 5,503 | ||||||
Accounts
and other receivables, net
|
23,492 | 21,678 | ||||||
Inventories,
net
|
24,277 | 25,911 | ||||||
Prepaid
expenses and other
|
1,516 | 2,419 | ||||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
6,474 | 6,205 | ||||||
Total
current assets
|
107,701 | 102,359 | ||||||
Other
assets:
|
||||||||
Marketable
equity securities
|
113,393 | 148,598 | ||||||
Investment
in Kronos Worldwide, Inc.
|
147,119 | 144,120 | ||||||
Pension
asset
|
17,623 | 19,297 | ||||||
Goodwill
|
54,719 | 54,749 | ||||||
Assets
held for sale
|
3,117 | 2,817 | ||||||
Other
assets, net
|
7,856 | 8,022 | ||||||
Total
other assets
|
343,827 | 377,603 | ||||||
Property
and equipment:
|
||||||||
Land
|
12,346 | 12,785 | ||||||
Buildings
|
35,963 | 36,203 | ||||||
Equipment
|
127,801 | 127,056 | ||||||
Construction
in progress
|
2,659 | 3,172 | ||||||
178,769 | 179,216 | |||||||
Less
accumulated depreciation
|
105,536 | 106,510 | ||||||
Net
property and equipment
|
73,233 | 72,706 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 524,761 | $ | 552,668 |
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS (CONTINUED)
(In
thousands)
LIABILITIES
AND STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY
|
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||
Current
liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
payable
|
$ | 8,769 | $ | 10,167 | ||||
Accrued
liabilities
|
27,188 | 28,405 | ||||||
Accrued
environmental costs
|
11,863 | 9,527 | ||||||
Income
taxes
|
136 | 163 | ||||||
Total
current liabilities
|
47,956 | 48,262 | ||||||
Non-current
liabilities:
|
||||||||
Note
payable to affiliate
|
49,730 | 49,230 | ||||||
Accrued
environmental costs
|
38,467 | 37,911 | ||||||
Accrued
postretirement benefit (OPEB) costs
|
9,865 | 9,643 | ||||||
Accrued
pension costs
|
1,665 | 1,492 | ||||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
91,124 | 103,144 | ||||||
Other
|
25,126 | 25,392 | ||||||
Total
non-current liabilities
|
215,977 | 226,812 | ||||||
Minority
interest
|
14,366 | 13,595 | ||||||
Stockholders'
equity:
|
||||||||
Common stock
|
6,073 | 6,074 | ||||||
Additional
paid-in capital
|
345,338 | 336,966 | ||||||
Retained
deficit
|
(6,525 | ) | (6,525 | ) | ||||
Accumulated
other comprehensive loss
|
(98,424 | ) | (72,516 | ) | ||||
Total
stockholders' equity
|
246,462 | 263,999 | ||||||
Total
liabilities, minority interest and stockholders’ equity
|
$ | 524,761 | $ | 552,668 |
Commitments
and contingencies (Note 10)
See
accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In
thousands, except per share data)
Three
months ended
June 30,
|
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||||||||||
Net
sales
|
$ | 45,229 | $ | 43,708 | $ | 88,780 | $ | 84,228 | ||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
33,368 | 32,727 | 64,797 | 63,805 | ||||||||||||
Gross
margin
|
11,861 | 10,981 | 23,983 | 20,423 | ||||||||||||
Selling,
general and administrative expense
|
6,571 | 6,504 | 13,237 | 12,908 | ||||||||||||
Other
operating income (expense):
|
||||||||||||||||
Insurance
recoveries
|
109 | 1,601 | 2,586 | 1,684 | ||||||||||||
Other
expense, net
|
(732 | ) | (57 | ) | (792 | ) | (88 | ) | ||||||||
Corporate
expense
|
(8,515 | ) | (6,960 | ) | (13,444 | ) | (10,736 | ) | ||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
(3,848 | ) | (939 | ) | (904 | ) | (1,625 | ) | ||||||||
Equity
in earnings (losses) of Kronos Worldwide, Inc.
|
(10 | ) | 2,085 | 4,599 | 1,945 | |||||||||||
Other
income (expense):
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest
and dividends
|
1,370 | 5,151 | 2,469 | 6,125 | ||||||||||||
Securities
transactions, net
|
(47 | ) | 20 | 56 | 10 | |||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(48 | ) | (504 | ) | (102 | ) | (1,266 | ) | ||||||||
Income
(loss) before income taxes and minority interest
|
(2,583 | ) | 5,813 | 6,118 | 5,189 | |||||||||||
Provision
for income taxes (benefit)
|
(1,838 | ) | 1,563 | 207 | 1,013 | |||||||||||
Minority
interest in after-tax earnings
|
785 | 285 | 1,675 | 501 | ||||||||||||
Net
income (loss)
|
$ | (1,530 | ) | $ | 3,965 | $ | 4,236 | $ | 3,675 | |||||||
Net
income (loss) per basic and diluted share
|
$ | (.03 | ) | $ | .08 | $ | .09 | $ | .08 | |||||||
Cash
dividend per share
|
$ | .125 | $ | .125 | $ | .25 | $ | .25 | ||||||||
Weighted-average
shares used in the calculation of net income per share:
|
||||||||||||||||
Basic
|
48,589 | 48,595 | 48,587 | 48,594 | ||||||||||||
Dilutive
impact of stock options
|
- | 8 | 9 | 8 | ||||||||||||
Diluted
|
48,589 | 48,603 | 48,596 | 48,602 |
See
accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF STOCKHOLDERS' EQUITY AND COMPREHENSIVE
INCOME
Six
months ended June 30, 2008
(In
thousands)
Accumulated
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Additional
|
Retained
|
other
|
Total
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Common
|
paid-in
|
earnings
|
comprehensive
|
stockholders’
|
Comprehensive
|
|||||||||||||||||||
stock
|
capital
|
(deficit)
|
loss
|
equity
|
income
|
|||||||||||||||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Balance
at December 31, 2007
|
$ | 6,073 | $ | 345,338 | $ | (6,525 | ) | $ | (98,424 | ) | $ | 246,462 | ||||||||||||
Net
income
|
- | - | 3,675 | - | 3,675 | $ | 3,675 | |||||||||||||||||
Other
comprehensive income, net
|
- | - | - | 25,908 | 25,908 | 25,908 | ||||||||||||||||||
Issuance
of common stock
|
1 | 102 | - | - | 103 | - | ||||||||||||||||||
Dividends
|
- | (8,474 | ) | (3,675 | ) | - | (12,149 | ) | - | |||||||||||||||
Balance
at June 30, 2008
|
$ | 6,074 | $ | 336,966 | $ | (6,525 | ) | $ | (72,516 | ) | $ | 263,999 | ||||||||||||
Comprehensive
income
|
$ | 29,583 |
See
accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In
thousands)
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||
Cash
flows from operating activities:
|
||||||||
Net
income
|
$ | 4,236 | $ | 3,675 | ||||
Depreciation
and amortization
|
5,695 | 4,770 | ||||||
Deferred
income taxes
|
(1,770 | ) | (1,538 | ) | ||||
Minority
interest
|
1,675 | 501 | ||||||
Equity
in earnings of Kronos Worldwide, Inc.
|
(4,599 | ) | (1,945 | ) | ||||
Dividends
from Kronos Worldwide, Inc.
|
8,758 | 8,758 | ||||||
Benefit
plan expense greater (less) than cash funding:
|
||||||||
Defined
benefit pension expense
|
(1,220 | ) | (1,485 | ) | ||||
Other
postretirement benefit expense
|
315 | 238 | ||||||
Other,
net
|
219 | 572 | ||||||
Change
in assets and liabilities:
|
||||||||
Accounts
and other receivables, net
|
(632 | ) | 81 | |||||
Inventories,
net
|
(3,565 | ) | (1,637 | ) | ||||
Prepaid
expenses and other
|
524 | (876 | ) | |||||
Accrued
environmental costs
|
(2,688 | ) | (2,892 | ) | ||||
Accounts
payable and accrued liabilities
|
718 | 1,165 | ||||||
Income
taxes
|
(587 | ) | (5 | ) | ||||
Accounts
with affiliates
|
(6,667 | ) | 2,120 | |||||
Other,
net
|
(1,613 | ) | (2,224 | ) | ||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
(1,201 | ) | 9,278 | |||||
Cash
flows from investing activities:
|
||||||||
Capital
expenditures
|
(5,603 | ) | (3,476 | ) | ||||
Collection
of note receivable
|
1,306 | 1,306 | ||||||
Change
in restricted cash equivalents and marketable debt securities,
net
|
1,928 | (4,827 | ) | |||||
Proceeds
from disposal of:
|
||||||||
Marketable
securities
|
9,608 | 361 | ||||||
Property
and equipment
|
43 | 250 | ||||||
Purchase
of:
|
||||||||
CompX
common stock
|
- | (1,006 | ) | |||||
Marketable
securities
|
(5,861 | ) | - | |||||
Net
cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
1,421 | (7,392 | ) |
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS (CONTINUED)
(In
thousands)
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||
(unaudited)
|
||||||||
Cash
flows from financing activities:
|
||||||||
Cash
dividends paid
|
$ | (12,147 | ) | $ | (12,149 | ) | ||
Distributions
to minority interest
|
(1,131 | ) | (412 | ) | ||||
Other,
net
|
203 | (50 | ) | |||||
Net
cash used in financing activities
|
(13,075 | ) | (12,611 | ) | ||||
Cash
and cash equivalents - net change from:
|
||||||||
Operating,
investing and financing activities
|
(12,855 | ) | (10,725 | ) | ||||
Currency
translation
|
695 | 462 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
52,742 | 41,112 | ||||||
Cash
and cash equivalents at end of period
|
$ | 40,582 | $ | 30,849 | ||||
Supplemental
disclosures – cash paid for:
|
||||||||
Interest
|
$ | 56 | $ | 1,305 | ||||
Income
taxes, net
|
9,003 | 425 | ||||||
Noncash
investing activity - receipt of TIMET shares
|
$ | 11,410 | $ | - | ||||
Accrual
for capital expenditures
|
1,232 | 293 |
See
accompanying Notes to Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
NL
INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
NOTES
TO CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
June
30, 2008
(unaudited)
Note
1 - Organization and basis of presentation:
Organization
- We are
majority-owned by Valhi, Inc. (NYSE: VHI), which owns approximately 83% of our
outstanding common stock at June 30, 2008. Valhi is majority-owned by
subsidiaries of Contran Corporation. Substantially all of Contran's
outstanding voting stock is held by trusts established for the benefit of
certain children and grandchildren of Harold C. Simmons (for which Mr. Simmons
is the sole trustee) or is held directly by Mr. Simmons or other persons or
companies related to Mr. Simmons. Consequently, Mr. Simmons may be
deemed to control Contran, Valhi and us.
Basis of
presentation - Consolidated in this
Quarterly Report are the results of our majority-owned subsidiary, CompX
International Inc. We also own 36% of Kronos Worldwide, Inc. which we
account for by the equity method. CompX (NYSE: CIX) and Kronos (NYSE:
KRO) each file periodic reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission
(“SEC”).
The
unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements contained in this
Quarterly Report have been prepared on the same basis as the audited
Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2007 that we filed with the SEC on March 12, 2008
(the “2007 Annual Report”), except as discussed in Note 11. In our
opinion, we have made all necessary adjustments (which include only normal
recurring adjustments) in order to state fairly, in all material respects, our
consolidated financial position, results of operations and cash flows as of the
dates and for the periods presented. We have condensed the
Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2007 contained in this Quarterly
Report as compared to our audited Consolidated Financial Statements at that
date, and we have omitted certain information and footnote disclosures
(including those related to the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2007)
normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting
principals generally accepted in the United States of America
(“GAAP”). Our results of operations for the interim period ended June
30, 2008 may not be indicative of our operating results for the full
year. The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements contained in
this Quarterly Report should be read in conjunction with our 2007 Consolidated
Financial Statements contained in our 2007 Annual Report.
Unless otherwise indicated, references
in this report to “NL,” “we,” “us” or “our” refer to NL Industries, Inc. and its
subsidiaries and affiliates, including Kronos, taken as a whole.
Note
2 – Accounts and other receivables, net:
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
|||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||
Trade
receivables
|
$ | 21,129 | $ | 20,791 | ||||
Other
receivables
|
1,535 | 1,256 | ||||||
Receivable
from affiliates:
|
||||||||
Income
taxes – Valhi
|
1,271 | - | ||||||
Refundable
income taxes
|
217 | 233 | ||||||
Allowance
for doubtful accounts
|
(660 | ) | (602 | ) | ||||
Total
|
$ | 23,492 | $ | 21,678 |
Note
3 – Inventories, net:
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
|||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||
Raw
materials
|
$ | 6,341 | $ | 9,156 | ||||
Work
in process
|
9,783 | 9,204 | ||||||
Finished
products
|
8,153 | 7,551 | ||||||
Total
|
$ | 24,277 | $ | 25,911 |
Note
4 - Marketable equity securities:
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
|||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||
Current
assets (available-for-sale):
|
||||||||
Restricted
debt securities
|
$ | 5,301 | $ | 5,304 | ||||
Other
marketable securities
|
559 | 199 | ||||||
Total
|
$ | 5,860 | $ | 5,503 | ||||
Noncurrent
assets (available-for-sale):
|
||||||||
Valhi
common stock
|
$ | 75,064 | $ | 128,325 | ||||
TIMET
common stock
|
38,329 | 20,273 | ||||||
Total
|
$ | 113,393 | $ | 148,598 |
Our
investments in Valhi and Titanium Metals Corporation (“TIMET”) common stock are
accounted for as available-for-sale marketable equity securities carried at fair
value based on quoted market prices, a Level 1 input as defined by SFAS No.
157. See Note 11. At December 31, 2007 and June 30, 2008,
we owned approximately 4.7 million shares of Valhi common stock and 1.4 million
shares of TIMET common stock. At June 30, 2008, the quoted market
price of Valhi’s and TIMET’s common stock was $27.25 and $13.99 per share,
respectively. At December 31, 2007, such quoted market prices were
$15.94 and $26.45 per share, respectively.
Note
5 – Investment in Kronos:
At
December 31, 2007 and June 30, 2008, we owned approximately 17.5 million shares
of Kronos common stock. At June 30, 2008, the quoted market price of
Kronos’ common stock was $15.39 per share, or an aggregate market value of
$269.6 million. At December 31, 2007, the quoted market price was
$17.45, or an aggregate market value of $305.7 million. The change in
the carrying value of our investment in Kronos during the first six months of
2008 is summarized below:
Amount
|
||||
(In
millions)
|
||||
Balance
at the beginning of the period
|
$ | 147.1 | ||
Equity
in earnings of Kronos
|
1.9 | |||
Dividends
received from Kronos
|
(8.7 | ) | ||
Other,
principally equity in other comprehensive income
items
of Kronos
|
3.8 | |||
Balance
at the end of the period
|
$ | 144.1 |
Selected
financial information of Kronos is summarized below:
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
|||||||
(In
millions)
|
||||||||
Current
assets
|
$ | 621.7 | $ | 647.8 | ||||
Property
and equipment, net
|
526.5 | 559.1 | ||||||
Investment
in TiO2
joint venture
|
118.5 | 115.6 | ||||||
Other
noncurrent assets
|
188.3 | 207.6 | ||||||
Total
assets
|
$ | 1,455.0 | $ | 1,530.1 | ||||
Current
liabilities
|
$ | 224.5 | $ | 235.8 | ||||
Long-term
debt
|
590.0 | 658.7 | ||||||
Accrued
pension and postretirement benefits
|
149.9 | 151.9 | ||||||
Other
non-current liabilities
|
79.6 | 81.2 | ||||||
Stockholders’
equity
|
411.0 | 402.5 | ||||||
Total
liabilities and stockholders’ equity
|
$ | 1,455.0 | $ | 1,530.1 |
Three
months ended
June 30,
|
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
(In
millions)
|
(In
millions)
|
|||||||||||||||
Net
sales
|
$ | 342.6 | $ | 391.9 | $ | 656.6 | $ | 724.4 | ||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
279.0 | 332.7 | 522.6 | 608.1 | ||||||||||||
Income
from operations
|
23.6 | 9.7 | 52.9 | 19.4 | ||||||||||||
Net
income
|
- | 5.8 | 12.9 | 5.4 |
Note
6 – Accrued liabilities:
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
|||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||
Employee
benefits
|
$ | 8,896 | $ | 7,899 | ||||
Professional
fees
|
4,322 | 5,455 | ||||||
Payable
to affiliates:
|
||||||||
Income
taxes – Valhi
|
- | 865 | ||||||
Note
payable to TIMET
|
250 | 750 | ||||||
Accrued
interest payable to TIMET
|
559 | 451 | ||||||
Other
|
340 | 322 | ||||||
Reserve
for uncertain tax positions
|
289 | 55 | ||||||
Other
|
12,532 | 12,608 | ||||||
Total
|
$ | 27,188 | $ | 28,405 |
Note
7 – Other non-current liabilities:
December
31,
2007
|
June
30,
2008
|
|||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||
Reserve
for uncertain tax positions
|
$ | 22,128 | $ | 22,538 | ||||
Insurance
claims and expenses
|
1,381 | 1,305 | ||||||
Other
|
1,617 | 1,549 | ||||||
Total
|
$ | 25,126 | $ | 25,392 |
Note
8 - Provision for income taxes:
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||
(In
millions)
|
||||||||
Expected
tax expense at U.S. federal statutory income tax rate of
35%
|
$ | 2.1 | $ | 1.8 | ||||
Non-U.S.
tax rates
|
- | (.1 | ) | |||||
Incremental
U.S. tax and rate differences on equity in earnings of non-tax group
companies
|
(2.2 | ) | (1.2 | ) | ||||
U.S.
state income taxes, net
|
.4 | .4 | ||||||
Change
in reserve for uncertain tax positions, net
|
.1 | .1 | ||||||
Nondeductible
expenses
|
.1 | .2 | ||||||
Other,
net
|
(.3 | ) | (.2 | ) | ||||
Total
|
$ | .2 | $ | 1.0 |
Tax
authorities are examining certain of our U.S. and non-U.S. tax returns and have
or may propose tax deficiencies, including penalties and interest. We
cannot guarantee that these tax matters will be resolved in our favor due to the
inherent uncertainties involved in settlement initiatives and court and tax
proceedings. We believe we have adequate accruals for additional
taxes and related interest expense which could ultimately result from tax
examinations. We believe the ultimate disposition of tax examinations
should not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial
position, results of operations or liquidity. We currently estimate
that our unrecognized tax benefits will decrease by approximately $2.0 million
during the next twelve months due to the resolution of certain examination and
filing procedures related to one or more of our subsidiaries and to the
expiration of certain statutes of limitations.
Note
9 – Employee benefit plans:
Defined benefit
plans - The
components of net periodic defined benefit pension cost (income) are presented
in the table below.
Three
months ended
June 30,
|
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest
cost
|
$ | 777 | $ | 787 | $ | 1,533 | $ | 1,554 | ||||||||
Expected
return on plan assets
|
(1,451 | ) | (1,561 | ) | (2,899 | ) | (3,121 | ) | ||||||||
Recognized
actuarial losses
|
74 | 41 | 146 | 82 | ||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | (600 | ) | $ | (733 | ) | $ | (1,220 | ) | $ | (1,485 | ) |
Postretirement
benefits - The components of net periodic postretirement benefits cost
are presented in the table below.
Three
months ended
June 30,
|
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
|||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||||||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||||||||||||||
Interest
cost
|
$ | 182 | $ | 164 | $ | 363 | $ | 328 | ||||||||
Amortization
of prior service credit
|
(28 | ) | (45 | ) | (56 | ) | (90 | ) | ||||||||
Recognized
actuarial losses
|
4 | - | 8 | - | ||||||||||||
Total
|
$ | 158 | $ | 119 | $ | 315 | $ | 238 |
Contributions – We expect our 2008
contributions for our pension and postretirement benefit plans to be consistent
with the amount disclosed in our 2007 Annual Report.
Note
10 – Commitments and contingencies:
Lead
pigment litigation
Our
former operations included the manufacture of lead pigments for use in paint and
lead-based paint. We, other former manufacturers of lead pigments for
use in paint and lead-based paint (together, the “former pigment
manufacturers”), and the Lead Industries Association (“LIA”), which discontinued
business operations in 2002, have been named as defendants in various legal
proceedings seeking damages for personal injury, property damage and
governmental expenditures allegedly caused by the use of lead-based
paints. Certain of these actions have been filed by or on behalf of
states, counties, cities or their public housing authorities and school
districts, and certain others have been asserted as class
actions. These lawsuits seek recovery under a variety of theories,
including public and private nuisance, negligent product design, negligent
failure to warn, strict liability, breach of warranty, conspiracy/concert of
action, aiding and abetting, enterprise liability, market share or risk
contribution liability, intentional tort, fraud and misrepresentation,
violations of state consumer protection statutes, supplier negligence and
similar claims.
The
plaintiffs in these actions generally seek to impose on the defendants
responsibility for lead paint abatement and health concerns associated with the
use of lead-based paints, including damages for personal injury, contribution
and/or indemnification for medical expenses, medical monitoring expenses and
costs for educational programs. A number of cases are inactive or
have been dismissed or withdrawn. Most of the remaining cases are in
various pre-trial stages. Some are on appeal following dismissal or
summary judgment rulings in favor of either the defendants or the
plaintiffs. In addition, various other cases are pending (in which we
are not a defendant) seeking recovery for injury allegedly caused by lead
pigment and lead-based paint. Although we are not a defendant in
these cases, the outcome of these cases may have an impact on cases that might
be filed against us in the future.
We
believe that these actions are without merit, and we intend to continue to deny
all allegations of wrongdoing and liability and to defend against all actions
vigorously. We do not believe it is probable that we have incurred
any liability with respect to all of the lead pigment litigation cases to which
we are a party, and liability to us that may result, if any, in this regard
cannot be reasonably estimated, because:
·
|
we
have never settled any of these
cases,
|
·
|
no
final, non-appealable verdicts have ever been entered against us,
and
|
·
|
we
have never ultimately been found liable with respect to any such
litigation matters.
|
In
particular, see the discussion below regarding the final resolution of the State of Rhode Island
case. Accordingly, we have not accrued any amounts for any of the
pending lead pigment and lead-based paint litigation cases.
New cases
may continue to be filed against us. We cannot assure you that we
will not incur liability in the future in respect of any of the pending or
possible litigation in view of the inherent uncertainties involved in court and
jury rulings. The resolution of any of these cases could result in
recognition of a loss contingency accrual that could have a material adverse
impact on our net income for the interim or annual period during which such
liability is recognized and a material adverse impact on our consolidated
financial condition and liquidity.
In October 1999, we were served with a
complaint in State of Rhode
Island v. Lead Industries Association, et al. (Superior Court of Rhode
Island, No. 99-5226). The State sought compensatory and punitive
damages, as well as reimbursement for public and private building abatement
expenses and funding of a public education campaign and health screening
programs. Following a 2002 trial on the sole question of whether lead
pigment in paint on Rhode Island buildings is a public nuisance resulted in a
mistrial when the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the question, a second
trial commenced against us and three other defendants in November 2005 on the
State’s remaining claims of public nuisance, indemnity and unjust
enrichment. Following the State’s presentation of its case, the trial
court dismissed the State’s claims of indemnity and unjust
enrichment. In February 2006, the jury found that we and two other
defendants substantially contributed to the creation of a public nuisance as a
result of the collective presence of lead pigments in paints and coatings on
buildings in Rhode Island. The jury also found that we and the two
other defendants should be ordered to abate the public
nuisance. Following the trial, the trial court dismissed the State’s
claim for punitive damages. In March 2007, the final judgment and
order was entered, and defendants filed an appeal. In April 2007, the
State cross-appealed the issue of exclusion of past and punitive damages as well
as the dismissal of one of the defendants. While the appeal was
pending, the trial court continued to move forward on the abatement
process. In September 2007, the State submitted its plan of abatement
and defendants filed a response in December 2007. In May 2008, oral
arguments on the appeal were heard by the Rhode Island Supreme Court, and in
July 2008 the Supreme Court reversed the decision of the trial court, stating
that the defendants’ motion to dismiss should have been granted. This
decision of the Rhode Island Supreme Court concludes the case in our favor, and
the state of Rhode Island’s plan of abatement will not be
implemented.
Environmental
matters and litigation
Our
operations are governed by various environmental laws and
regulations. Certain of our businesses are and have been engaged in
the handling, manufacture or use of substances or compounds that may be
considered toxic or hazardous within the meaning of applicable environmental
laws and regulations. As with other companies engaged in similar
businesses, certain of our past and current operations and products have the
potential to cause environmental or other damage. We have implemented
and continue to implement various policies and programs in an effort to minimize
these risks. Our policy is to maintain compliance with applicable
environmental laws and regulations at all of our plants and to strive to improve
environmental performance. From time to time, we may be subject to
environmental regulatory enforcement under U.S. and foreign statutes, the
resolution of which typically involves the establishment of compliance
programs. It is possible that future developments, such as stricter
requirements of environmental laws and enforcement policies, could adversely
affect our production, handling, use, storage, transportation, sale or disposal
of such substances. We believe that all of our facilities are in
substantial compliance with applicable environmental laws.
Certain
properties and facilities used in our former operations, including divested
primary and secondary lead smelters and former mining locations, are the subject
of civil litigation, administrative proceedings or investigations arising under
federal and state environmental laws. Additionally, in connection
with past operating practices, we are currently involved as a defendant,
potentially responsible party (“PRP”) or both, pursuant to the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended by the
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (“CERCLA”), and similar state laws
in various governmental and private actions associated with waste disposal
sites, mining locations, and facilities we or our predecessors currently or
previously owned, operated or were used by us or our subsidiaries, or their
predecessors, certain of which are on the United States Environmental Protection
Agency’s (“EPA”) Superfund National Priorities List or similar state
lists. These proceedings seek cleanup costs, damages for personal
injury or property damage and/or damages for injury to natural
resources. Certain of these proceedings involve claims for
substantial amounts. Although we may be jointly and severally liable
for these costs, in most cases we are only one of a number of PRPs who may also
be jointly and severally liable. In addition, we are a party to a
number of personal injury lawsuits filed in various jurisdictions alleging
claims related to environmental conditions alleged to have resulted from our
operations.
Environmental
obligations are difficult to assess and estimate for numerous reasons including
the:
·
|
complexity
and differing interpretations of governmental
regulations,
|
·
|
number
of PRPs and their ability or willingness to fund such allocation of
costs,
|
·
|
financial
capabilities of the PRPs and the allocation of costs among
them,
|
·
|
solvency
of other PRPs,
|
·
|
multiplicity
of possible solutions, and
|
·
|
number
of years of investigatory, remedial and monitoring activity
required.
|
In
addition, the imposition of more stringent standards or requirements under
environmental laws or regulations, new developments or changes regarding site
cleanup costs or allocation of costs among PRPs, solvency of other PRPs, the
results of future testing and analysis undertaken with respect to certain sites
or a determination that we are potentially responsible for the release of
hazardous substances at other sites, could cause our expenditures to exceed our
current estimates. Because we may be jointly and severally liable for
the total remediation cost at certain sites, the amount for which we are
ultimately liable may exceed our accruals due to, among other things, the
reallocation of costs among PRPs or the insolvency of one or more
PRPs. We cannot assure you that actual costs will not exceed accrued
amounts or the upper end of the range for sites for which estimates have been
made, and we cannot assure you that costs will not be incurred for sites where
no estimates presently can be made. Further, additional environmental
matters may arise in the future. If we were to incur any future
liability, this could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
financial statements, results of operations and liquidity.
We record
liabilities related to environmental remediation obligations when estimated
future expenditures are probable and reasonably estimable. We adjust
our environmental accruals as further information becomes available to us or as
circumstances change. We generally do not discount estimated future
expenditures to their present value due to the uncertainty of the timing of the
pay out. We recognize recoveries of remediation costs from other
parties, if any, as assets when their receipt is deemed probable. At
June 30, 2008, we have not recognized any receivables for
recoveries.
We do not
know and cannot estimate the exact time frame over which we will make payments
for our accrued environmental costs. The timing of payments depends
upon a number of factors including the timing of the actual remediation process;
which in turn depends on factors outside of our control. At each
balance sheet date, we estimate the amount of our accrued environmental costs
which we expect to pay within the next twelve months, and we classify this
estimate as a current liability. We classify the remaining accrued
environmental costs as a noncurrent liability.
Changes
in the accrued environmental costs during the first six months of 2008 are as
follows:
Amount
|
||||
(In
thousands)
|
||||
Balance
at the beginning of the period
|
$ | 50,330 | ||
Additions
charged to expense, net
|
407 | |||
Payments,
net
|
(3,299 | ) | ||
Balance
at the end of the period
|
$ | 47,438 | ||
Amounts
recognized in the balance sheet at the end of the period:
|
||||
Current
liability
|
$ | 9,527 | ||
Noncurrent
liability
|
37,911 | |||
Total
|
$ | 47,438 |
On a
quarterly basis, we evaluate the potential range of our liability at sites where
we have been named as a PRP or defendant, including sites for which our
wholly-owned environmental management subsidiary, NL Environmental Management
Services, Inc. (“EMS”) has contractually assumed our obligations. At
June 30, 2008, we had accrued approximately $47 million for those environmental
matters which we believe are reasonably estimable. We believe that it
is not possible to estimate the range of costs for certain sites. The
upper end of the range of reasonably possible costs to us for sites for which we
believe it is possible to estimate costs is approximately $68 million, including
the amount currently accrued. We have not discounted these estimates
to present value.
At June
30, 2008, there were approximately 20 sites for which we are
not currently able to estimate a range of costs. For these sites,
generally the investigation is in the early stages, and we are unable to
determine whether or not we actually had any association with the site, the
nature of our responsibility, if any, for the contamination at the site and the
extent of contamination at the site. The timing and availability of
information on these sites is dependent on events outside of our control, such
as when the party alleging liability provides information to us. At
certain of these previously inactive sites, we have received general and special
notices of liability from the EPA alleging that we, along with other PRPs, are
liable for past and future costs of remediating environmental contamination
allegedly caused by former operations conducted at the sites. These
notifications may assert that we, along with other PRPs, are liable for past
clean-up costs that could be material to us if we are ultimately found
liable.
In 2005,
certain real property we owned that is subject to environmental remediation, and
for which we had a nominal carrying value, was taken from us in a condemnation
proceeding by a governmental authority in New Jersey. The
condemnation proceeds, the adequacy of which NL is disputing, were placed into
escrow with a court in New Jersey and have never been remitted to us while the
condemnation litigation is pending. Because such funds were placed in
escrow with the court and are beyond our control, we have never given
recognition to such condemnation proceeds for financial reporting
purposes. In April 2008, we reached a tentative settlement agreement
with such governmental authority and a real estate developer, among others,
pursuant to which, among other things, NL would receive certain agreed-upon
amounts in satisfaction of its claim to just compensation for the taking of its
property in the condemnation proceeding, and NL would be indemnified against
certain environmental liabilities related to such property. The
tentative settlement agreement was subject to certain conditions which
ultimately were not met, and on May 2, 2008 we terminated such
agreement. As part of such April 2008 agreement, however, NL became
entitled to receive the interest accrued on the escrow funds, and in May 2008 NL
received approximately $4.3 million of such interest which was recognized as
interest income in the second quarter of 2008. In late June 2008 the
settlement agreement was reinstated and remains subject to certain conditions
prior to closing, which, to date, have not occurred.
Insurance
coverage claims
We are involved in various legal
proceedings with certain of our former insurance carriers regarding the nature
and extent of the carriers’ obligations to us under insurance policies with
respect to certain lead pigment and asbestos lawsuits. The issue of
whether insurance coverage for defense costs or indemnity or both will be found
to exist for our lead pigment and asbestos litigation depends upon a variety of
factors, and we cannot assure you that such insurance coverage will be
available. We have not considered any potential insurance recoveries for
lead pigment or asbestos litigation matters in determining related
accruals.
We have agreements with two former
insurance carriers pursuant to which the carriers reimburse us for a portion of
our past and future lead pigment litigation defense costs. We are not able
to determine how much we will ultimately recover from these carriers for past
defense costs incurred by us, because of certain issues that arise regarding
which past defense costs qualify for reimbursement. While we continue to
seek additional insurance recoveries, we do not know if we will be successful in
obtaining reimbursement for either defense costs or indemnity. We have not
considered any additional potential insurance recoveries in determining accruals
for lead pigment or asbestos litigation matters. Any additional insurance
recoveries would be recognized when the receipt is probable and the amount is
determinable.
We
recognize insurance recoveries in income only when receipt of the recovery is
probable and we are able to reasonably estimate the amount of the
recovery.
For a
complete discussion of certain litigation involving us and certain of our former
insurance carriers, refer to our 2007 Annual Report.
Other litigation
We have
been named as a defendant in various lawsuits in several jurisdictions, alleging
personal injuries as a result of occupational exposure primarily to products
manufactured by our former operations containing asbestos, silica and/or mixed
dust. Approximately 470 of these types of cases remain pending, involving
a total of approximately 6,500 plaintiffs. In addition, the claims of
approximately 3,400 former plaintiffs have been administratively dismissed from
Ohio State Courts. We do not expect these claims will be re-opened
unless the plaintiffs meet the courts’ medical criteria for asbestos-related
claims. We have not accrued any amounts for this litigation because
of the uncertainty of liability and inability to reasonably estimate the
liability, if any. To date, we have not been adjudicated liable in any of
these matters. Based on information available to us,
including:
·
|
facts
concerning historical operations,
|
·
|
the
rate of new claims,
|
·
|
the
number of claims from which we have been
dismissed,
|
·
|
and
our prior experience in the defense of these
matters,
|
we
believe that the range of reasonably possible outcomes of these matters will be
consistent with our historical costs (which are not
material). Furthermore, we do not expect any reasonably possible
outcome would involve amounts material to our consolidated financial position,
results of operations or liquidity. We have and will continue to
vigorously seek dismissal and/or a finding of no liability from each
claim. In addition, from time to time, we have received notices regarding
asbestos or silica claims purporting to be brought against former subsidiaries,
including notices provided to insurers with which we have entered into
settlements extinguishing certain insurance policies. These insurers may
seek indemnification from us.
For a
discussion of other legal proceedings to which we are a party, refer to our 2007
Annual Report.
In
addition to the litigation described above, we and our affiliates are also
involved in various other environmental, contractual, product liability, patent
(or intellectual property), employment and other claims and disputes incidental
to present and former businesses. In certain cases, we have insurance
coverage for these items, although we do not expect additional material
insurance coverage for environmental claims.
We
currently believe that the disposition of all of these various other claims and
disputes, individually or in the aggregate, should not have a material adverse
effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or
liquidity beyond the accruals already provided.
CompX stock repurchase
program
CompX’s
board of directors previously authorized the repurchase of its Class A common
stock in open market transactions, including block purchases, or in
privately-negotiated transactions at unspecified prices and over an unspecified
period of time. CompX may repurchase its common stock from time to
time as market conditions permit. The stock repurchase program does
not include specific price targets or timetables and may be suspended at any
time. Depending on market conditions, CompX may terminate the program
prior to its completion. CompX may use cash on hand or debt to
acquire the shares. Repurchased shares will be added to CompX’s
treasury and cancelled. During the first six months of 2008, CompX
purchased approximately 126,000 shares of its Class A common stock in market
transactions for an aggregate of $1.0 million in cash. At June 30,
2008 approximately 678,000 shares were available for purchase under these
repurchase authorizations.
Note
11 – Recent accounting pronouncements:
Fair Value
Measurements – In September 2006, the
Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements,
which became effective for us on January 1, 2008. SFAS No. 157
generally provides a consistent, single fair value definition and measurement
techniques for GAAP pronouncements. SFAS No. 157 also establishes a
fair value hierarchy for different measurement techniques based on the objective
nature of the inputs in various valuation methods. In February 2008,
the FASB issued FSP No. FAS 157-2, Effective Date of FASB Statement No.
157 which delays the provisions of SFAS No. 157 until January 1, 2009 for
all nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except those that are
recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial statements on a recurring
basis (at least annually). Beginning with our first quarter 2008
filing, all of our fair value measurements are in compliance with SFAS No. 157,
except for such non financial assets and liabilities for which we will be
required to be in compliance with SFAS No. 157 prospectively beginning in the
first quarter of 2009. In addition, in accordance with the new standard we
have expanded our disclosures regarding the valuation methods and level of
inputs we utilize beginning with our first quarter 2008 filing, except for such
non-financial assets and liabilities, which will require disclosure in the first
quarter of 2009. The adoption of this standard did not have a material
effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
Fair Value
Option - In the
first quarter of 2007 the FASB issued SFAS No. 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial
Assets and Financial Liabilities. SFAS 159 permits companies
to choose, at specified election dates, to measure eligible items at fair value,
with unrealized gains and losses included in the determination of net
income. The decision to elect the fair value option is generally
applied on an instrument-by-instrument basis, is irrevocable unless a new
election date occurs, and is applied to the entire instrument and not to only
specified risks or cash flows or a portion of the instrument. Items
eligible for the fair value option include recognized financial assets and
liabilities, other than an investment in a consolidated subsidiary, defined
benefit pension plans, OPEB plans, leases and financial instruments classified
in equity. An investment accounted for by the equity method is an
eligible item. The specified election dates include the date the
company first recognizes the eligible item, the date the company enters into an
eligible commitment, the date an investment first becomes eligible to be
accounted for by the equity method and the date SFAS No. 159 first becomes
effective for the company. SFAS No. 159 became effective for us on
January 1, 2008. We did not elect to measure any eligible items at
fair value in accordance with this new standard either at the date we adopted
the new standard or subsequently during the first six months of 2008; therefore
the adoption of this standard did not have a material effect on our Consolidated
Financial Statements.
Noncontrolling
Interest – In
December 2007 the FASB issued SFAS No. 160, Noncontrolling Interests in
Consolidated Financial Statements, an Amendment of ARB No. 51. SFAS
No. 160 establishes a single method of accounting for changes in a parent’s
ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in deconsolidation.
On a prospective basis any changes in ownership will be accounted for as equity
transactions with no gain or loss recognized on the transactions unless there is
a change in control; under existing GAAP such changes in ownership generally
result either in the recognition of additional goodwill (for an increase in
ownership) or a gain or loss included in the determination of net income (for a
decrease in ownership). The statement standardizes the presentation of
noncontrolling interest as a component of equity on the balance sheet and on a
net income basis in the statement of operations. This Statement also
requires expanded disclosures in the consolidated financial statements that
clearly identify and distinguish between the interests of the parent and the
interests of the noncontrolling owners of a subsidiary. Those expanded
disclosures include a reconciliation of the beginning and ending balances of the
equity attributable to the parent and the noncontrolling owners and a schedule
showing the effects of changes in a parent’s ownership interest in a subsidiary
on the equity attributable to the parent. This statement will be effective
for us on a prospective basis in the first quarter of 2009. We will be
required to reclassify our balance sheet and statement of operations to conform
to the new presentation requirements and to include the expanded disclosures at
that time. Because the new method of accounting for changes in ownership
applies on a prospective basis, we are unable to predict the impact of the
statement on our Consolidated Financial Statements. However, to the extent
that we have subsidiaries that are not wholly owned at the date of adoption, any
subsequent increase in ownership of such subsidiaries for an amount of
consideration that exceeds the then-carrying value of the noncontrolling
interest related to the increased ownership would result in a reduction in the
amount of equity attributable to our shareholders.
Derivative
Disclosures – In March 2008 the FASB issued SFAS No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative
Instruments and Hedging Activities, an Amendment of FASB Statement No.
133. SFAS No. 161 changes the disclosure requirements for
derivative instruments and hedging activities to provide enhanced disclosures
about how and why we use derivative instruments, how derivative instruments and
related hedged items are accounted for under SFAS No. 133 and how derivative
instruments and related hedged items affect our financial position and
performance and cash flows. This statement will become effective for us in
the first quarter of 2009. We periodically use currency forward contracts
to manage a portion of our foreign currency exchange rate market risk associated
with trade receivables or future sales. We had no such contracts
outstanding at December 31, 2007 or June 30, 2008. Because our prior
disclosures regarding these forward contracts have substantially met all of the
applicable disclosure requirements of the new standard, we do not believe the
enhanced disclosure requirements of this new standard will have a significant
effect on our Consolidated Financial Statements.
GAAP Hierarchy
– In May 2008 the
FASB issued SFAS No. 162, The
Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. SFAS
No. 162 supersedes Statement on Auditing Standards (“SAS”) No. 69, The Meaning of Present Fairly in
Conformity with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. The
guidance in this new standard, which identifies the sources of accounting
principles and the framework for selecting the principles to be used in the
preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP, is not materially
different from the guidance contained in SAS 69, and accordingly, this standard,
when adopted, will not have any effect on our Consolidated Financial
Statements. The effective date of this standard has not yet been
determined.
ITEM
2. MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Business
and results of operations overview
We are primarily a holding
company. We operate in the component products industry through our
majority-owned subsidiary, CompX International Inc. We also own a
non-controlling interest in Kronos Worldwide, Inc. Both CompX (NYSE:
CIX) and Kronos (NYSE: KRO) file periodic reports with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”).
CompX is
a leading manufacturer of security products, precision ball bearing slides and
ergonomic computer support systems used in the office furniture, transportation,
tool storage and a variety of other industries. CompX is also a
leading manufacturer of stainless steel exhaust systems, gauges and throttle
controls for the performance marine industry.
We account for our 36% non-controlling
interest in Kronos by the equity method. Kronos is a leading global
producer and marketer of value-added titanium dioxide pigments (“TiO2”). TiO2 is used
for a variety of manufacturing applications including plastics, paints, paper
and other industrial products.
Forward-looking
information
This report contains forward-looking
statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of
1995. Statements in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q that are not
historical facts are forward-looking in nature. Statements found in
this report including, but not limited to, the statements found in Item 2 -
"Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations," are forward-looking statements that represent our beliefs and
assumptions based on currently available information. In some cases
you can identify these forward-looking statements by the use of words such as
"believes," "intends," "may," "should," "could," "anticipates," "expected" or
comparable terminology, or by discussions of strategies or
trends. Although we believe the expectations reflected in
forward-looking statements are reasonable, we do not know if these expectations
will be correct. Forward-looking statements by their nature involve
substantial risks and uncertainties that could significantly impact expected
results. Actual future results could differ materially from those
predicted. While it is not possible to identify all factors, we
continue to face many risks and uncertainties. Among the factors that
could cause our actual future results to differ materially from those described
herein are the risks and uncertainties discussed in this Quarterly Report and
those described from time to time in our other filings with the SEC including,
but not limited to, the following:
·
|
Future
supply and demand for our products,
|
·
|
The
extent of the dependence of certain of our businesses on certain market
sectors,
|
·
|
The
cyclicality of our businesses (such as Kronos’ TiO2 operations),
|
·
|
Customer
inventory levels (such as the extent to which Kronos’ customers may, from
time to time, accelerate purchases of TiO2 in advance of
anticipated price increases or defer purchases of TiO2 in advance of
anticipated price decreases),
|
·
|
Changes
in raw material and other operating costs (such as energy
costs),
|
·
|
The
possibility of labor disruptions,
|
·
|
General
global economic and political conditions (such as changes in the level of
gross domestic product in various regions of the world and the impact of
such changes on demand for, among other things, TiO2 and
component products),
|
·
|
Competitive
products and substitute products, including increased competition from
low-cost manufacturing sources (such as
China),
|
·
|
Customer
and competitor strategies,
|
·
|
Potential
consolidation or solvency of our
competitors,
|
·
|
Demand
for high performance marine
components,
|
·
|
The
impact of pricing and production
decisions,
|
·
|
Competitive
technology positions,
|
·
|
Service
industry employment levels,
|
·
|
Possible
disruption of our business or increases in the cost of doing business
resulting from terrorist activities or global
conflicts,
|
·
|
The
introduction of trade barriers,
|
·
|
Fluctuations
in currency exchange rates (such as changes in the exchange rate between
the U.S. dollar and each of the euro, the Norwegian kroner and the
Canadian dollar),
|
·
|
Operating
interruptions (including, but not limited to, labor disputes, leaks,
natural disasters, fires, explosions, unscheduled or unplanned downtime
and transportation interruptions),
|
·
|
The
timing and amounts of insurance
recoveries,
|
·
|
The
ability to renew or refinance credit
facilities,
|
·
|
The
extent to which our subsidiaries were to become unable to pay us
dividends,
|
·
|
Potential
difficulties in integrating completed or future
acquisitions,
|
·
|
Decisions
to sell operating assets other than in the ordinary course of
business,
|
·
|
Uncertainties
associated with new product
development,
|
·
|
The
ultimate outcome of income tax audits, tax settlement initiatives or other
tax matters,
|
·
|
The
ultimate ability to utilize income tax attributes or change in income tax
rates related to such attributes, the benefit of which has been recognized
under the more likely than not recognition criteria (such as Kronos’
ability to utilize its German net operating loss
carryforwards),
|
·
|
Environmental
matters (such as those requiring compliance with emission and discharge
standards for existing and new facilities, or new developments regarding
environmental remediation at sites related to our former
operations),
|
·
|
Government
laws and regulations and possible changes therein (such as changes in
government regulations which might impose various obligations on present
and former manufacturers, including us, of lead pigment and lead-based
paint, with respect to asserted health concerns associated with the use of
such products),
|
·
|
The
ultimate resolution of pending litigation (such as our lead
pigment and environmental litigation)
and
|
·
|
Possible
future litigation.
|
Should one or more of these risks materialize or if the consequences of such a
development worsen, or should the underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual
results could differ materially from those currently forecasted or
expected. We disclaim any intention or obligation to update or revise
any forward-looking statement whether as a result of changes in information,
future events or otherwise.
Results
of Operations
Net
Income Overview
Quarter
Ended June 30, 2008 Compared to Quarter Ended June 30, 2007
Our net
income was $4.0 million, or $.08 per diluted share, in the second quarter of
2008 compared to a net loss of $1.5 million, or $.03 per diluted share, in
the second quarter of 2007. Our diluted earnings per share increased
from 2007 to 2008 due primarily to the combined effects of:
·
|
higher
equity in earnings of Kronos in
2008,
|
·
|
higher
interest income in 2008,
|
·
|
lower
litigation and related expenses in 2008
and
|
·
|
higher
insurance recoveries in 2008.
|
Our 2008
net income includes:
·
|
interest
income of $.06 per diluted share related to certain escrow
funds,
|
·
|
income
included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.03 per diluted share
related to an adjustment of certain income tax attributes of Kronos in
Germany, and
|
·
|
income
of $.02 per diluted share related to certain insurance
recoveries.
|
Our net
income in 2007 includes a charge included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of
$.04 per diluted share related to an adjustment of certain income tax attributes
of Kronos in Germany.
Six
Months Ended June 30, 2008 Compared to Six Months Ended June 30,
2007
Our net
income was $3.7 million, or $.08 per diluted share, in the first six months of
2008 compared to income of $4.2 million, or $.09 per diluted share, in the first
six months of 2007. The decrease in our diluted earnings per share
from 2007 to 2008 is due primarily to the combined effects of:
·
|
lower
equity in earnings of Kronos in
2008,
|
·
|
lower
component products income from operations in
2008,
|
·
|
lower
insurance recoveries in 2008,
|
·
|
lower
litigation and related expenses in 2008
and
|
·
|
higher
interest income in 2008.
|
Our net
income in 2008 includes:
·
|
interest
income of $.06 per diluted share related to certain escrow
funds,
|
·
|
income
included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.03 per diluted share
related to an adjustment of certain income tax attributes of Kronos in
Germany, and
|
·
|
income
of $.02 per diluted share related to certain insurance
recoveries.
|
Our net
income in 2007 includes:
·
|
a
charge included in our equity in earnings of Kronos of $.04 per diluted
share related to an adjustment of certain income tax attributes of Kronos
in Germany, and
|
·
|
income
of $.03 per diluted share related to certain insurance
recoveries.
|
Loss
from Operations
The following table shows the
components of our loss from operations.
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
June 30,
|
%
|
June 30,
|
%
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
Change
|
2007
|
2008
|
Change
|
|||||||||||||||||||
(In
millions)
|
(In
millions)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
CompX
|
$ | 4.4 | $ | 4.4 | - | % | $ | 9.9 | $ | 7.4 | (25 | )% | ||||||||||||
Insurance
recoveries
|
.1 | 1.6 | 1,369 | % | 2.6 | 1.7 | (35 | )% | ||||||||||||||||
Corporate
expense and other, net
|
(8.3 | ) | (6.9 | ) | (17 | )% | (13.4 | ) | (10.7 | ) | (20 | )% | ||||||||||||
Loss
from operations
|
$ | (3.8 | ) | $ | (.9 | ) | 76 | % | $ | (.9 | ) | $ | (1.6 | ) | (79 | )% |
Amounts attributable to CompX relate to
its components products business, while the other amounts generally relate to
NL. Each of these items is further discussed below.
CompX International
Inc.
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
June 30,
|
%
|
June 30,
|
%
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
Change
|
2007
|
2008
|
Change
|
|||||||||||||||||||
(In
millions)
|
(In
millions)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
sales
|
$ | 45.2 | $ | 43.7 | (3 | )% | $ | 88.8 | $ | 84.2 | (5 | )% | ||||||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
33.3 | 32.7 | (2 | )% | 64.8 | 63.8 | (2 | )% | ||||||||||||||||
Gross
margin
|
$ | 11.9 | $ | 11.0 | $ | 24.0 | $ | 20.4 | ||||||||||||||||
Income
from operations
|
$ | 4.4 | $ | 4.4 | - | % | $ | 9.9 | $ | 7.4 | (25 | )% | ||||||||||||
Percentage
of net sales:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
74 | % | 75 | % | 73 | % | 76 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Income
from operations
|
10 | % | 10 | % | 11 | % | 9 | % |
Net sales –
Our component products net sales decreased 3% and 5%, respectively, in
the second quarter and first six months of 2008 compared to the same periods in
2007. Net sales decreased principally due to lower order rates from
many of our customers resulting from unfavorable economic conditions in North
America, offset in part by the effect of sales price increases for certain
products to mitigate the effect of higher raw material costs and the favorable
effect of relative changes in foreign currency exchange rates, as discussed
below.
Cost of sales and
gross margin – Our component products cost of sales decreased 2% in both
the second quarter and first six months of 2008 as compared to the same periods
in 2007 due to decreased sales volumes. As a percentage of net sales,
our gross margin decreased 1% and 2% in the second quarter and first six months
of 2008, respectively, compared to the same periods in 2007 primarily due to
higher raw material costs, not all of which could be recovered through sales
price increases or surcharges, and changes in product mix (primarily in the
security products line) combined with reduced coverage of fixed manufacturing
costs from lower sales volume.
Income from
operations – Our component products income from operations in the second
quarter of 2008 was comparable to the second quarter of 2007. As a
percentage of net sales, income from operations decreased approximately 2% in
the first six months of 2008 compared to the first six months of 2007 due to the
decline in net sales and gross margin discussed above. In addition,
changes in foreign currency exchange rates negatively impacted income from
operations comparisons by $.4 million in the year-to-date period while favorably
impacting income from operations comparisons by $.2 million for the quarter, as
discussed below.
Currency -
CompX has substantial operations and assets located outside the United
States (in Canada and Taiwan). The majority of sales generated from
CompX’s non-U.S. operations are denominated in the U.S. dollar with the
remainder denominated in foreign currencies, principally the Canadian dollar and
the New Taiwan dollar. Most raw materials, labor and other production
costs for these non-U.S. operations are denominated primarily in local
currencies. Consequently, the translated U.S. dollar values of
CompX's non-U.S. sales and operating results are subject to currency exchange
rate fluctuations which may favorably or unfavorably impact reported earnings
and may affect comparability of period-to-period operating results. Overall,
fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates had the following effects on our
component products net sales and income from operations in 2008 as compared to
2007.
Three
months ended
June
30, 2008
vs. 2007
|
Six
months ended
June
30, 2008
vs. 2007
|
|||||||
(Increase
(decrease), in thousands)
|
||||||||
Impact
on:
|
||||||||
Net
sales
|
$ | 341 | $ | 1,011 | ||||
Income
from operations
|
215 | (360 | ) |
Outlook
– Demand
continues to be slow across most of our component product lines as customers
react to the condition of the overall economy. However, we are
experiencing a greater softness in demand in the industries that we serve which
is directly connected to lower consumer spending, as further explained
below.
·
|
Our
security products line is the least affected by the softness in consumer
demand, as these products are sold to a diverse number of business
customers across a wide range of markets, most of which are not directly
impacted by changes in consumer demand. While demand may be
fairly stable for this business line, it is unclear as to when sales
growth will return.
|
·
|
Our
furniture components sales are primarily concentrated in the office
furniture, toolbox, home appliance and a number of other
industries. Several of these industries are more directly
affected by consumer demand than those served by our security products
line. We expect many of the markets served by furniture
components to continue to experience low demand in the short
term.
|
·
|
Our
marine line has been affected the most by the slowing economy as the
decrease in consumer confidence, the decline in home values, a tighter
credit market and higher fuel costs have resulted in a significant
reduction in consumer spending in the marine market. The marine
market is not currently expected to recover until consumer confidence
returns and home values stabilize. A continued
under-performance of the marine market over the next twelve to eighteen
months could negatively impact our required annual impairment evaluation
of the goodwill allocated to the marine line. An adverse outcome
from the evaluation could directly affect income from
operations.
|
While
changes in market demand are not within our control, we are focused on the areas
that we can impact. Our lean manufacturing and cost cutting
initiatives are expected to continue to improve our productivity and result in a
more efficient infrastructure that can be leveraged when demand growth
returns. Additionally, we continue to seek opportunities to gain
market share in markets we currently serve, expand into new markets and develop
new products in order to mitigate the impact of reduced demand as well as
broaden our sales base.
In
addition to challenges with overall demand, volatility in the cost of our raw
materials is ongoing. We currently expect this to be a challenge for
the remainder of 2008. We may not be able to fully recover these
costs through price increases or surcharges due to the competitive nature of the
markets we serve.
General
corporate and other items
Insurance
recoveries –
Insurance recoveries relate to amounts we received from certain of our
former insurance carriers, and relate principally to recovery of prior lead
pigment litigation defense costs incurred by us. We have agreements
with two former insurance carriers pursuant to which the carriers reimburse us
for a portion of our past and future lead pigment litigation defense
costs. The insurance recoveries we recognized in all periods
presented include amounts we received from these carriers. We are not
able to determine how much we will ultimately recover from these carriers for
the past defense costs we incurred because of certain issues that arise
regarding which past defense costs qualify for reimbursement.
While we continue to seek additional
insurance recoveries for lead pigment and asbestos litigation matters, we do not
know if we will be successful in obtaining additional reimbursement for either
defense costs or indemnity. We have not considered any additional
potential insurance recoveries in determining accruals for lead pigment
litigation matters. Any additional insurance recoveries would be
recognized when the receipt is probable and the amount is
determinable.
Corporate expense
– Corporate expenses were $7.0 million in the second quarter of 2008,
$1.5 million or 18% lower than in the second quarter of
2007. Included in corporate expense are:
·
|
litigation
and related costs of $5.6 million in 2008 compared to $7.6 million in
2007, and
|
·
|
environmental
expenses of $266,000 in 2008, compared to a credit of $337,000 in
2007.
|
Corporate
expenses were $10.7 million in the first six months of 2008, $2.7 million or 20%
lower, compared to the first six months of 2007. Included in corporate expense
are:
·
|
litigation
and related costs of $8.7 million in 2008 compared to $11.7 million in
2007, and
|
·
|
environmental
expenses of $408,000 in 2008 compared to $633,000 in
2007.
|
We expect
corporate expenses in 2008 will continue to be lower than in 2007, in part due
to lower expected litigation and related expenses. The level of our
litigation and related expenses varies from period to period depending upon,
among other things, the number of cases in which we are currently involved, the
nature of such cases and the current stage of such cases (e.g. discovery,
pre-trial motions, trial or appeal, if
applicable).
Obligations
for environmental remediation costs are difficult to assess and
estimate, and it is possible that actual costs for environmental remediation
will exceed accrued amounts or that costs will be incurred in the future for
sites in which we cannot currently estimate our liability. If these
events were to occur in the remainder of 2008, our corporate expenses would be
higher than we currently estimate. See Note 10 to the
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.
Equity
in earnings of Kronos Worldwide, Inc.
Three
months ended
|
Six
months ended
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
June 30,
|
%
|
June 30,
|
%
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
Change
|
2007
|
2008
|
Change
|
|||||||||||||||||||
(In
millions)
|
(In
millions)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Kronos
historical:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net
sales
|
$ | 342.6 | $ | 391.9 | 14 | % | $ | 656.6 | $ | 724.4 | 10 | % | ||||||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
279.0 | 332.7 | 19 | % | 522.6 | 608.1 | 16 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Gross
margin
|
$ | 63.6 | $ | 59.2 | $ | 134.0 | $ | 116.3 | ||||||||||||||||
Income
from operations
|
$ | 23.6 | $ | 9.7 | (59 | )% | $ | 52.9 | $ | 19.4 | (63 | )% | ||||||||||||
Other,
net
|
.4 | .2 | 1.0 | .6 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Interest
expense
|
(9.8 | ) | (11.1 | ) | (19.3 | ) | (21.7 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
14.2 | (1.2 | ) | 34.6 | (1.7 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||
Income
tax expense (benefit)
|
14.2 | (7.0 | ) | 21.7 | (7.1 | ) | ||||||||||||||||||
Net
income
|
$ | - | $ | 5.8 | $ | 12.9 | $ | 5.4 | ||||||||||||||||
Percentage
of net sales:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost
of sales
|
81 | % | 85 | % | 80 | % | 84 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Income
from operations
|
7 | % | 2 | % | 8 | % | 3 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Equity
in earnings of Kronos
Worldwide,
Inc.
|
$ | - | $ | 2.1 | $ | 4.6 | $ | 1.9 | ||||||||||||||||
TiO2
operating statistics:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Sales
volumes*
|
137 | 141 | 3 | % | 262 | 269 | 3 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Production
volumes*
|
128 | 133 | 4 | % | 261 | 265 | 2 | % | ||||||||||||||||
Change
in Ti02
net sales:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ti02
product pricing
|
(1 | )% | (3 | )% | ||||||||||||||||||||
Ti02
sales volume
|
3 | % | 3 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Ti02
product mix
|
2 | % | 2 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Changes
in currency exchange rates
|
10 | % | 8 | % | ||||||||||||||||||||
Total
|
14 | % | 10 | % |
_______________________________
*
Thousands of metric tons
The key
performance indicators for Kronos are TiO2 average
selling prices and TiO2 sales and
production volumes.
Net
sales –
Kronos’ net
sales increased 14% or $49.3 million compared to the second quarter of 2007 and
10% or $67.8 million compared to the six months ended June 30, 2007 primarily
due to the impact of favorable changes in foreign currency exchange rates and
increases in sales volumes offset by a decrease in average TiO2 selling
prices. Kronos estimates the favorable effect of changes in currency
exchange rates increased net sales by approximately $33 million, or 10%, in the
three months ended June 30, 2008 compared to the same period in 2007 and
increased net sales by approximately $54 million, or 8% in the first six months
of 2008 compared to the same period in 2007.
Kronos’
sales volumes in both the second quarter of 2008 and the six months ended June
30, 2008 were 3% higher compared to 2007 primarily due to higher sales volumes
in export markets. Sales volumes in the second quarter of 2008 and
the first six months of 2008 were a new record for Kronos.
Cost of
sales – Kronos’
cost of sales increased $53.7 million or 19% in the second quarter of 2008
compared to 2007 due to the impact of a 16% increase in utility costs (primarily
energy costs), a 9% increase in raw material costs and currency fluctuations
(primarily the euro). Cost of sales as a percentage of net sales
increased to 85% in the second quarter of 2008 compared to 81% in the second
quarter of 2007 due to the unfavorable effects of higher operating costs and
lower average TiO2 selling
prices. TiO2 production
volumes increased 4% in the second quarter of 2008 compared to the same period
in 2007, with operating rates near full capacity in both periods.
Kronos’
cost of sales increased $85.5 million or 16% in the six months ended June 30,
2008, compared to the same period in 2007, due to the impact of a 13% increase
in utility costs (primarily energy costs), a 7% increase in raw material costs
and currency fluctuations (primarily the euro). Cost of sales as a
percentage of net sales increased to 84% in the six months ended June 30, 2008,
compared to 80% in the same period of 2007 due to the unfavorable effects of
higher operating costs and lower average TiO2 selling
prices. TiO2 production
volumes increased 2% in the first six months of 2008 compared to the same period
in 2007, with operating rates near full capacity in both periods.
Production
volumes in the second quarter of 2008 and for first six months of 2008 were also
a new record for Kronos.
Income from
operations –
Kronos’ income from operations for the second quarter of 2008 declined by
59% to $9.7 million compared to the same period in 2007. Income
from operations as a percentage of net sales declined to 2% in the second
quarter of 2008 from 7% in the same period for 2007. This decrease is
driven by the decline in gross margin, which fell to 15% as a percentage of net
sales for the second quarter of 2008 compared to 19% for the second quarter of
2007.
Kronos’
income from operations for the six months ended June 30, 2008 declined by 63% to
$19.4 million compared to the same period in 2007. Income from
operations as a percentage of net sales declined to 3% in the six months ended
June 30, 2008 from 8% in the same period for 2007. This decrease is
driven by the decline in gross margin, which fell to 16% as a percentage of net
sales in 2008 compared to 20% in 2007.
While
Kronos’ sales volumes are higher in 2008, gross margin has decreased as pricing
has not improved to offset the negative impact of increased operating costs
(primarily energy costs and raw materials). Changes in currency rates
have negatively affected Kronos’ gross margin and income from
operations. Kronos estimates the negative effect of changes in
foreign currency exchange rates decreased its income from operations by
approximately $8 million in the second quarter of 2008 and $16 million in the
first six months of 2008 as compared to the same periods in 2007.
Interest
expense –
Kronos’ interest expense increased $1.3 million from $9.8 million in the second
quarter of 2007 to $11.1 million in the second quarter of 2008 and increased
$2.4 million from $19.3 million in the six months ended June 30, 2007 to $21.7
million in the six months ended June 30, 2008, primarily due to changes in
foreign currency exchange rates as well as to a higher average balance of
outstanding borrowings under its revolving credit facilities, primarily in
Europe. Excluding the effect of currency exchange rates, Kronos
expects that interest expense will continue to be higher in 2008 as compared to
2007.
Kronos
has a significant amount of indebtedness denominated in the euro, primarily the
6.5% Senior Secured Notes. The interest expense Kronos recognizes
will vary with fluctuations in the euro exchange rate.
Provision for
income taxes – Kronos’ income tax benefit was $7.0 million in the second
quarter of 2008 compared to a provision for income taxes of $14.2 million in the
same period last year and $7.1 million in the first six months of 2008 compared
to a provision for income taxes of $21.7 million in the same period last
year. Kronos’ income tax benefit in 2008 includes a $7.2 million
income tax benefit related to a European Court’s ruling that resulted in the
favorable resolution of certain income tax issues in Germany and an increase in
the amount of Kronos’ German corporate and trade tax net operating loss
carryforwards. The provision for income taxes in 2007 includes an
$8.7 million charge related to the adjustment of certain German income tax
attributes.
Currency – Kronos has substantial operations
and assets located outside the United States (primarily in Germany, Belgium,
Norway and Canada). The majority of Kronos’ foreign operations’ sales
are denominated in foreign currencies, principally the euro, other major
European currencies and the Canadian dollar. A portion of sales
generated from Kronos’ foreign operations is denominated in the U.S.
dollar. Certain raw materials used worldwide, primarily
titanium-containing feedstocks, are purchased in U.S. dollars, while labor and
other production costs are purchased primarily in local
currencies. Consequently, the translated U.S. dollar value of Kronos’
foreign sales and operating results are subject to currency exchange rate
fluctuations which may favorably or adversely impact reported earnings and may
affect the comparability of period-to-period operating
results. Overall, fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates had
the following effect on Kronos’ sales and income from operations in 2008 as
compared to 2007.
Three
months ended
June
30, 2008
vs. 2007
|
Six
months ended
June
30, 2008
vs. 2007
|
|||||||
(Increase
(decrease), in millions)
|
||||||||
Impact
on:
|
||||||||
Net
sales
|
$ | 33 | $ | 54 | ||||
Income
from operations
|
(8 | ) | (16 | ) |
Outlook -
During June and July of 2008, Kronos and several of Kronos’ competitors
announced various price increases and surcharges in response to higher operating
costs. These price increase announcements are to be implemented
during the second half of 2008. As a result, Kronos expects that its
average selling prices in the second half of 2008 will be higher than its
average selling prices in the first half of 2008. Kronos expects that
overall demand will continue to remain high for the remainder of the year in
export markets, while demand in North America and Europe may be somewhat weaker
in the second half of 2008. Overall, Kronos expects that its income
from operations for the remainder of 2008 will be lower than the same period in
2007, as the favorable effects of anticipated improvements in product pricing
and in production volume are expected to be more than offset by higher
production costs, particularly raw material, energy, and labor
costs. However, Kronos’ income from operations in the second half of
2008 is expected to be higher than the first half of 2008, due principally to
the impact of the implementation of the recent price increase announcements.
Kronos’ expectations as to the future of the TiO2 industry
are based upon a number of factors beyond Kronos’ control, including worldwide
growth of gross domestic product, competition in the marketplace, unexpected or
earlier-than-expected capacity additions and technological
advances. If actual developments differ from expectations, Kronos’
results of operations could be unfavorably affected.
Other
items
Interest income
- Interest
income in the second quarter of 2008 includes $4.3 million earned on certain
escrow funds. See Note 10 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
Interest expense
- Substantially
all of our interest expense relates to CompX. Interest expense is
higher in 2008 compared to 2007 primarily due to a note payable to an affiliate
CompX issued in the fourth quarter 2007. Interest expense is expected
to continue to be higher in the remainder of 2008 as compared to the same
periods in 2007 as a result of this note.
Provision for
income taxes - See
Note 8 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements for a tabular
reconciliation of our statutory tax expense to our actual tax
provision.
In
accordance with GAAP, we recognize deferred income taxes on our undistributed
equity in earnings of Kronos. We do not recognize, and we are not
required to pay, income taxes to the extent we receive dividends from
Kronos. Because we and Kronos are part of the same U.S. federal
income tax group, we are entitled to a 100% dividends received deduction on the
dividends we receive from Kronos. Therefore, our effective income tax
rate will generally be lower than the U.S. federal statutory income tax
rate.
Minority interest
- Minority
interest in earnings decreased $1.2 million in the first six months of 2008 as
compared to 2007. This decrease is due to both our increased
ownership of CompX as compared to the same period last year and to lower
earnings of CompX in 2008.
LIQUIDITY
AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
Consolidated
cash flows
Operating
activities
Trends in
cash flows from operating activities (excluding the impact of deferred taxes and
relative changes in assets and liabilities) are generally similar to trends in
our earnings. Cash flows from operating activities increased from a
net use of cash of $1.2 million in the first six months of 2007 to $9.3 million
provided by operating activities in the first six months of 2008. The
$10.5 million increase in cash provided by operating activities includes the net
effect of:
·
|
lower
cash paid for income taxes in 2008 of $8.6 million due in part to income
tax payments we made in 2007 related to the capital gain generated from
Valhi’s previously-reported distribution of shares of TIMET common stock
in March 2007,
|
·
|
lower
net cash used by changes in receivables, inventories, prepaids, payables
and accrued liabilities in 2008 of $1.5 million due primarily to relative
changes in CompX’s working capital levels, as discussed
below,
|
·
|
higher
interest income of $3.7 million in 2008 due primarily to $4.3 million of
interest received from certain escrow
funds,
|
·
|
lower
income from operations in 2008 of $720,000
and
|
·
|
higher
cash paid for interest in 2008 of $1.2 million due to CompX’s issuance of
its note payable to an affiliate in the fourth quarter of
2007.
|
We do not
have complete access to CompX’s cash flows in part because we do not own 100% of
CompX. A detail of our consolidated cash flows from operating
activities is presented in the table below. Intercompany dividends
have been eliminated.
Six
months ended
June 30,
|
||||||||
2007
|
2008
|
|||||||
(In
millions)
|
||||||||
Cash
provided by (used in) operating activities:
|
||||||||
CompX
|
$ | 5.3 | $ | 5.4 | ||||
NL
Parent and wholly-owned subsidiaries
|
(3.8 | ) | 6.6 | |||||
Eliminations
|
(2.7 | ) | (2.7 | ) | ||||
Total
|
$ | (1.2 | ) | $ | 9.3 |
Relative
changes in working capital can have a significant effect on cash flows from
operating activities. Our average days’ sales outstanding (“DSO”)
decreased from 44 days at December 31, 2007 to 42 days at June 30, 2008 due to
timing of collections at the end of June. For comparative purposes,
our average DSO increased from 41 days at December 31, 2006 to 44 days at June
30, 2007. Our average number of days in inventory (“DII”) was 66 days
at December 31, 2007 and 72 days at June 30, 2008. The increase in
days in inventory is primarily due to the higher cost of commodity raw materials
at June 30, 2008 combined with lower sales. Additionally, our raw
material balance is higher as a result of purchasing higher than normal
quantities to mitigate the impact of expected future cost
increases. For comparative purposes, our average DII increased from
57 to 70 days at December 31, 2006 and June 30, 2007, respectively, primarily
due to the higher cost of commodity raw materials at June 30, 2007.
Investing
and financing activities
Net cash
used in investing activities totaled $7.4 million in the first six months of
2008 compared to net cash provided of $1.4 million in the first six months of
2007. During the first six months of 2008:
·
|
we
incurred $3.5 million of capital expenditures, substantially all of which
relates to CompX,
|
·
|
we
collected $1.3 million on a note
receivable,
|
·
|
we
used $4.3 million of cash to fund two new escrow accounts related to
environmental matters (such escrow funds are classified as restricted
cash) and
|
·
|
we
purchased approximately 126,000 shares of CompX common stock in market
transactions for $1.0 million.
|
Net cash
used in financing activities totaled $12.6 million in the first six months of
2008 compared to $13.1 million in the first six months of 2007. We
paid aggregate cash dividends of $12.1 million, or $.25 per share, during the
first six months of 2008 and 2007. Distributions to minority
interests consist of CompX dividends paid to shareholders other than
us.
Provisions
contained in certain of CompX’s and Kronos’ credit agreements could result in
the acceleration of the applicable indebtedness prior to its stated maturity for
reasons other than defaults from failing to comply with typical financial
covenants. For example, certain credit agreements allow the lender to
accelerate the maturity of the indebtedness upon a change of control (as
defined) of the borrower. In addition, certain credit agreements
could result in the acceleration of all or a portion of the indebtedness
following a sale of assets outside the ordinary course of business.
CompX and
Kronos are in compliance with all of their debt covenants at June 30,
2008.
Future
cash requirements
Liquidity
Our
primary source of liquidity on an ongoing basis is our cash flow from operating
activities, including the dividends Kronos, Valhi and TIMET pay to
us. We generally use these amounts to (i) fund capital expenditures,
(ii) pay ongoing environmental remediation and legal expenses and (iii) provide
for the payment of dividends.
At June 30, 2008, there were no amounts
outstanding under CompX’s $50 million revolving credit facility that matures in
January 2009 and the entire balance was available for future
borrowings.
At June 30, 2008, we had an aggregate
of $46.1 million of restricted and unrestricted cash, cash equivalents and debt
securities. A detail by entity is presented in the table
below.
Amount
|
||||
(In
millions)
|
||||
CompX
|
$ | 18.2 | ||
NL
Parent and wholly-owned subsidiaries
|
27.9 | |||
Total
|
$ | 46.1 |
In
addition, at June 30, 2008 we owned 4.7 million shares of Valhi common stock and
1.4 million shares of TIMET common stock with an aggregate market value of
$148.6 million. See Note 4 to the Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
We
routinely compare our liquidity requirements and alternative uses of capital
against the estimated future cash flows we expect to receive from our
subsidiaries and affiliates. As a result of this process, we have in
the past and may in the future seek to raise additional capital, incur debt,
repurchase indebtedness in the market or otherwise, modify our dividend
policies, consider the sale of our interests in our subsidiaries, affiliates,
business units, marketable securities or other assets, or take a combination of
these and other steps, to increase liquidity, reduce indebtedness and fund
future activities. Such activities have in the past and may in the
future involve related companies.
We
periodically evaluate acquisitions of interests in or combinations with
companies (including related companies) perceived by management to be
undervalued in the marketplace. These companies may or may not be
engaged in businesses related to our current businesses. We intend to
consider such acquisition activities in the future and, in connection with this
activity, may consider issuing additional equity securities and increasing
indebtedness. From time to time, we also evaluate the restructuring
of ownership interests among our respective subsidiaries and related
companies.
Based
upon our expectations of our operating performance, and the anticipated demands
on our cash resources we expect to have sufficient liquidity to meet our
short-term obligations (defined as the twelve-month period ending June 30, 2009)
and our long-term obligations (defined as the five-year period ending December
31, 2013, our time period for long-term budgeting). If actual
developments differ from our expectations, our liquidity could be adversely
affected.
Capital
Expenditures
Firm
purchase commitments for capital projects in process at June 30, 2008
approximated $2.2 million. We expect to spend approximately $1.7
million in the remainder of 2008 to complete the replacement of waste treatment
equipment at CompX’s South Carolina facility.
Dividends
Because
our operations are conducted primarily through subsidiaries and affiliates, our
long-term ability to meet parent company-level corporate obligations is largely
dependent on the receipt of dividends or other distributions from our
subsidiaries and affiliates. Kronos currently pays a regular
quarterly cash dividend of $.25 per share. At that rate, and based on
the 17.5 million shares of Kronos we held at June 30, 2008, we would receive
annual dividends from Kronos of $17.5 million. CompX currently pays a
regular quarterly dividend of $.125 per share. At that rate, and
based on the 10.7 million shares of CompX we held at June 30, 2008, we would
receive annual dividends from CompX of $5.4 million. In addition,
both Valhi and TIMET pay regular quarterly dividends of $.10 per share and $.075
per share, respectively. At those rates, and based on the 4.7 million
shares of Valhi and 1.4 million shares of TIMET we held at June 30, 2008, we
would receive annual dividends from Valhi and TIMET of $1.9 million and
$435,000, respectively. Our ability to service our liabilities and
pay dividends on common stock could be adversely affected if our subsidiaries
and affiliates were to become unable to make sufficient cash dividends or other
distributions. In addition, a significant portion of our assets
consist of ownership interests in our subsidiaries and affiliates. If
we were required to liquidate securities in order to generate funds to satisfy
our liabilities, we may be required to sell such securities on the open market
and may not be able to realize the book value of the assets.
Investments
in our subsidiaries and affiliates and other acquisitions
We have
in the past, and may in the future, purchase the securities of our subsidiaries
and affiliates or third-parties in market or privately-negotiated
transactions. We base our purchase decisions on a variety of factors,
including an analysis of the optimal use of our capital, taking into account the
market value of the securities and the relative value of expected returns on
alternative investments. In connection with these activities, we may
consider issuing additional equity securities or increasing our
indebtedness. We may also evaluate the restructuring of ownership
interests of our businesses among our subsidiaries and related
companies.
Off-balance
sheet financing arrangements
We do not
have any off-balance sheet financing agreements other than the operating leases
discussed in our 2007 Annual Report.
Commitments
and contingencies
We are subject to certain commitments
and contingencies, as more fully described in Note 10 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements or in Part II, Item 1 of this
report. In addition to those legal proceedings described in Note 10
to the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, various legislation and
administrative regulations have, from time to time, been proposed that seek to
(i) impose various obligations on present and former manufacturers of lead
pigment and lead-based paint (including NL) with respect to asserted health
concerns associated with the use of such products and (ii) effectively overturn
court decisions in which we and other pigment manufacturers have been
successful. Examples of such proposed legislation include bills which
would permit civil liability for damages on the basis of market share, rather
than requiring plaintiffs to prove that the defendant's product caused the
alleged damage, and bills which would revive actions barred by the statute of
limitations. While no legislation or regulations have been enacted to
date that are expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated
financial position, results of operations or liquidity, enactment of such
legislation could have such an effect.
Recent
accounting pronouncements
See Note 11 to the Condensed
Consolidated Financial Statements.
Critical
accounting policies and estimates
For a
discussion of our critical accounting policies, refer to Part I, Item 7 -
“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations” in our 2007 Annual Report. There have been no changes in
our critical accounting policies during the first six months of
2008.
ITEM
3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURE ABOUT MARKET
RISK
We are exposed to market risk,
including foreign currency exchange rates, interest rates and security
prices. For a discussion of such market risk items, refer to Part I,
Item 7A. - “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure About Market Risk” in our
2007 Annual Report. There have been no material changes in these
market risks during the first six months of 2008.
ITEM
4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Evaluation of
disclosure controls and procedures - We maintain a system of
disclosure controls and procedures. The term "disclosure controls and
procedures," as defined by Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e), means controls and other
procedures that are designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed
in the reports that we file or submit to the SEC under the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (the "Act"), is recorded, processed, summarized and
reported within the time periods specified in the SEC's rules and
forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without
limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information we are
required to disclose in the reports we file or submit to the SEC under the Act
is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our principal
executive officer and our principal financial officer, or persons performing
similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions to be made regarding
required disclosure. Each of Harold C. Simmons, our Chief Executive
Officer, and Gregory M. Swalwell, our Vice President, Finance and Chief
Financial Officer, have evaluated the design and effectiveness of our disclosure
controls and procedures as of June 30, 2008. Based upon their
evaluation, these executive officers have concluded that our disclosure controls
and procedures are effective as of June 30, 2008.
Internal control
over financial reporting - We
also maintain internal control over financial reporting. The term
“internal control over financial reporting,” as defined by Exchange Act Rule
13a-15(f), means a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our
principal executive and principal financial officers, or persons performing
similar functions, and effected by 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 GAAP, and includes those policies and procedures
that:
·
|
pertain
to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and
fairly reflect transactions and dispositions of our
assets;
|
·
|
provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP, and that
receipts and expenditures are made only in accordance with authorizations
of our management and directors;
and
|
·
|
provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of an
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of assets that could have a
material effect on our Condensed Consolidated Financial
Statements.
|
As
permitted by the SEC, our assessment of internal control over financial
reporting excludes (i) internal control over financial reporting of equity
method investees and (ii) internal control over the preparation of our financial
statement schedules required by Article 12 of Regulation
S-X. However, our assessment of internal control over financial
reporting with respect to equity method investees did include our controls over
the recording of amounts related to our investment that are recorded in our
Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, including controls over the
selection of accounting methods for our investments, the recognition of equity
method earnings and losses and the determination, valuation and recording of our
investment account balances.
Changes in
Internal Control over Financial Reporting - There has been no change
to our internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended June
30, 2008 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
PART
II. OTHER INFORMATION
Item
1. Legal Proceedings
In addition to the matters discussed
below, refer to Note 10 to our Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements, to
our 2007 Annual Report and to our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter
ended March 31, 2008.
State of Rhode Island v. Lead
Industries Association, et al. (Superior Court of Rhode Island, No.
99-5226). Oral arguments on the appeal were heard by the Rhode Island
Supreme Court in May 2008. In July 2008, the Supreme Court reversed
the decision of the trial court, stating that the defendants’ motion to dismiss
should have been granted. This decision of the Supreme Court
concludes the case in our favor.
Smith, et al. v. Lead Industries
Association, et al. (Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, Case No.
24-C-99-004490). In May 2008, the Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed
the Special Court’s dismissal of the appeal.
County of Santa Clara v. Atlantic
Richfield Company, et al. (Superior Court of the State of California,
County of Santa Clara, Case No. CV788657). In May 2008, the
defendants filed a petition for review by the California Supreme
Court. In July 2008, the defendants’ petition for review was granted
by the California Supreme Court.
Lewis,
et al. v. Lead Industries Association, et al. (Circuit Court of Cook
County, Illinois, County Department, Chancery Division, Case
No. 00CH09800). In April 2008, the Judge certified a class
of children whose blood lead levels were screened venously between August
1995 and February 2008 and who had incurred expenses associated with such
screening.
Columbus City, Ohio v.
Sherwin-Williams Company et al. (Court of Common Pleas, Franklin County,
Ohio, Case No. 06CVH-12-16480). In July 2008, the city voluntarily
dismissed its complaint with prejudice.
Wisconsin
Cases. Of the cases, 25 have been dismissed without prejudice,
and six remain pending. Four of the remaining six cases have been
removed to Federal court, and all six of the pending cases have been
stayed.
Smith et al. v. 2328 University
Avenue Corp. et al. (Supreme Court, State of New York, Case No.
13470/02). In June 2008, the appellate court reversed the ruling of
the lower court, dismissing the case. In July 2008, the plaintiffs
filed a motion for leave to appeal with the Court of Appeals.
The Quapaw Tribe of Oklahoma et al.
v. ASARCO Incorporated et al. (United States District Court, Northern
District of Oklahoma, Case No. 03-CII-846H(J)). In July 2008, the
court granted the defendants’ motion to dismiss the Tribe’s CERCLA natural
resources damages claim.
Brown et al. v. NL Industries, Inc.
et al. (Circuit Court Wayne County, Michigan, Case No. 06-602096
CZ). In April 2008, co-defendant Honeywell International agreed to a
settlement with the Plaintiffs.
In June
2008, we were served in Barton, et al. v. NL Industries,
Inc., (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Michigan, Case No.:
2:08-CV-12558). Plaintiffs, property owners and other past or present
residents of the Krainz Woods Neighborhood of Wayne County, Michigan, allege
causes of action in negligence, nuisance, trespass and under the Michigan
Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act with respect to a lead
smelting facility formerly operated by us and another
defendant. Plaintiffs seek property damages, personal injury damages,
loss of income and medical expense and medical monitoring costs. We
intend to deny all liability and to defend against all of the claims
vigorously.
Unilateral Administrative Order,
Park Hills, Mo. In May 2008, the parties began work at the
site as required by the Unilateral Order and in accordance with the cost sharing
agreement.
Item
1A. Risk Factors
For a
discussion of the risk factors related to our businesses, refer to Part I, Item
1A., “Risk Factors,” in our 2007 Annual Report. There have been no
material changes in such risk factors during the first six months of
2008.
Item
4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security
Holders
Our 2008
Annual Meeting of Shareholders was held on May 21, 2008. At the
annual meeting:
·
|
Cecil
H. Moore, Jr., Glenn R. Simmons, Harold C. Simmons, Thomas P. Stafford,
Steven L. Watson and Terry N. Worrell were elected as directors, each
receiving votes “For” his election from at least 94.6% of the
approximately 48.6 million shares of our common stock eligible to vote at
the meeting;
|
·
|
the
proposal to adopt an amendment to our certificate of incorporation to
remove Article XI (Requirements for Certain Business Transactions;
Exceptions) was approved, receiving a vote “For” such proposal
from:
|
o
|
at
least 99.4% of the votes cast for such
proposal;
|
o
|
at
least 97.5% of our outstanding shares of common stock eligible to vote at
the meeting; and
|
o
|
at
least 82.3% of the outstanding shares of our common stock eligible to vote
at the meeting excluding from the
number of shares deemed to be outstanding at the time of such vote and
from such vote those shares which were beneficially owned, directly or
indirectly, by Harold C. Simmons or his affiliates (which number of shares
of our common stock beneficially owned by Harold C. Simmons and his
affiliates was deemed to be 41,796,006 shares);
and
|
·
|
the
proposal to amend and restate our certificate of incorporation (including
the removal of Article XI (Requirements for Certain Business Transactions;
Exceptions) since it separately received the requisite vote for its
elimination), was approved, receiving a vote “For” such proposal
from:
|
o
|
at
least 95.7% of the votes cast for such proposal;
and
|
o
|
at
least 93.8% of our outstanding shares of common stock eligible to vote at
the meeting.
|
Item
6. Exhibits
10.1 –
|
Third
Amendment Agreement Relating to a Facility Agreement dated June 25, 2002
executed as of May 26, 2008 by and among Deutsche Bank AG, as mandated
lead arranger, Deutsche Bank Luxembourg S.A., as agent, the participating
lenders, Kronos Titan GmbH, Kronos Europe S.A,/N.V, Kronos Titan AS,
Kronos Norge AS, Titania AS and Kronos Denmark ApS - incorporated by
reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the Current Report on Form 8-K of Kronos
International, Inc. (File No. 333-100047) dated May 26,
2008. Certain schedules, exhibits, annexes and similar
attachments to this Exhibit 10.1 have not been filed; upon request, the
registrant will furnish supplementally to the Commission a copy of any
omitted exhibit, annex or
attachment.
|
31.1
-
|
Certification
|
31.2
-
|
Certification
|
32.1 -
|
Certification
|
SIGNATURES
Pursuant
to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has
duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto
duly authorized.
NL
INDUSTRIES,
INC.
(Registrant)
Date August 4,
2008
|
/s/ Gregory M.
Swalwell
|
|
Gregory
M. Swalwell
|
||
(Vice
President, Finance and
Chief
Financial Officer,
Principal
Financial Officer)
|
||
Date August 4,
2008
|
/s/ Tim C. Hafer
|
|
Tim
C. Hafer
|
||
(Vice
President and Controller,
Principal
Accounting Officer)
|