ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORP - Quarter Report: 2017 March (Form 10-Q)

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2017

Or

For the transition period from                        to

(Commission File Number) 000-30419

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

5005 E. McDowell Road

Phoenix, AZ 85008

(602) 244-6600

(Address, zip code and telephone number, including area code, of principal executive offices)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes   ☒    No  ☐

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an emerging growth company as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act of 1933 (§230.405 of this chapter) or Rule 12b-2 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (§240.12b-2 of this chapter).

Emerging growth company  ☐

If emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised

financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ☐    No  ☒

The number of shares outstanding of the issuer’s class of common stock as of the close of business on May 3, 2017:

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

FORM 10-Q

TABLE OF CONTENTS

(See the glossary of selected terms immediately following this table of contents for definitions of certain abbreviated terms)

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

FORM 10-Q

GLOSSARY OF SELECTED ABBREVIATED TERMS*

* Terms used, but not defined, within the body of the Form 10-Q are defined in this Glossary.

Table of Contents

PART I: FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1. Financial Statements (unaudited)

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(in millions, except share and per share data)

(unaudited)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements

4

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(in millions, except per share data)

(unaudited)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements

5

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(in millions)

(unaudited)

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements

6

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(unaudited)

Note 1:    Background and Basis of Presentation

ON Semiconductor Corporation, together with its wholly-owned and majority-owned subsidiaries (“ON Semiconductor” or the “Company”), uses a thirteen-week fiscal quarter accounting period for the first three fiscal quarters of each year, with the first quarter of 2017 ending on March 31, 2017, and each fiscal year ending on December 31. The three months ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016 contained 90 and 92 days, respectively. As of March 31, 2017, the Company was organized into the following three operating and reporting segments: Power Solutions Group, Analog Solutions Group and Image Sensor Group. Additional details on the Company’s reportable segments are included in Note 16: “Segment Information.”

The accompanying unaudited financial statements as of and for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”) for unaudited interim financial information. Accordingly, the unaudited financial statements do not include all of the information and footnotes required by GAAP for audited financial statements. The balance sheet as of December 31, 2016 was derived from the Company’s audited financial statements but does not include all disclosures required by GAAP for audited financial statements. In the opinion of the Company’s management, the interim information includes all adjustments, which consist of normal recurring adjustments, necessary for a fair statement of the results for the interim periods. The footnote disclosures related to the interim financial information included herein are also unaudited. Such financial information should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto for the year ended December 31, 2016 included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, filed with the SEC on February 28, 2017 (“2016 Form 10-K”). Financial results for interim periods are not necessarily indicative of the results of operations that may be expected for a full fiscal year.

Revenue Recognition Policy

The Company generates revenue from sales of its semiconductor products to OEMs, electronic manufacturing service providers and distributors. The Company also generates revenue, to a much lesser extent, from manufacturing and design services provided to customers. Revenue is recognized when persuasive evidence of an arrangement exists, title and risk of loss pass to the customer (generally upon shipment), the price is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. Revenues are recorded net of provisions for related sales returns and allowances.

Previously, for products sold to distributors who are entitled to returns and allowances (generally referred to as “ship and credit rights”), the Company recognized the related revenue and cost of revenues when it was informed by the distributor that it had resold the products to the end-user. This was due to the Company’s inability to reliably estimate up front the effects of the returns and allowances with these distributors for sales originating through the ON Semiconductor systems and processes. Legacy systems and processes of Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. (“Fairchild”) enable the Company to estimate up front the effects of returns and allowances provided to these distributors and thereby record the net revenue at the time of sale related to a legacy Fairchild system and process.

When the company adopts ASU 2014-09, ASU 2015-14, ASU 2016-08, ASU 2016-10, ASU 2016-12 and ASU 2016-20 (see Note 2: “Recent Accounting Pronouncements”), one of the more significant impacts will be that it will not be permitted to defer revenue until sale by the distributor to the end customer, but rather, will be required to estimate the effects of returns and allowances provided to certain distributors and record revenue at the time of sale to the distributor. In anticipation of the adoption of the new standards, the Company has been developing its internal systems, processes and controls for making the required estimates on the sales to these distributors. As a result of these process changes, during the first quarter of 2017, the Company was able to reliably estimate upfront the effects of returns and allowances and record revenue at the time of sales to these distributors. As a result of this change, the Company recognized $155.1 million in revenue during the first quarter of 2017. The impact of this change resulted in an increase of $59.0 million to income before income taxes, or $0.09 per basic and diluted share. Additionally, the Company recorded accruals as part of its closing process for the estimated returns from the distributors which decreased revenue by $8.1 million and income before income taxes by $5.3 million.

7

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Although payment terms vary, most distributor agreements require payment within 30 days. Sales returns and allowances are estimated based on historical experience. The Company’s OEM customers do not have the right to return products, other than pursuant to the provisions of the Company’s standard warranty. Sales to distributors, however, are typically made pursuant to agreements that provide return rights with respect to discontinued or slow-moving products. Provisions for discounts and rebates to customers, estimated returns and allowances, and other adjustments are provided for in the same period the related revenues are recognized, and are netted against revenues. The Company reviews warranty and related claims activities and records provisions, as necessary.

Freight and handling costs are included in cost of revenues and are recognized as period expense when incurred. Taxes assessed by government authorities on revenue-producing transactions, including value-added and excise taxes, are presented on a net basis (excluded from revenues) in the statement of operations.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amount of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amount of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Significant estimates have been used by management in conjunction with the following: (i) estimates of future payouts for customer incentives and allowances, returns and warranties; (ii) measurement of valuation allowances relating to inventories and trade receivables; (iii) future cash flows used to assess and test for impairment of goodwill and long-lived assets, if applicable; (iv) assumptions surrounding future pension obligations; (v) fair values of share-based compensation and of financial instruments (including derivative financial instruments); (vi) measurement of valuation allowances against deferred tax assets and evaluations of uncertain tax positions; and (vii) estimates and assumptions used in connection with business combinations. Actual results could differ from these estimates.

Note 2:    Recent Accounting Pronouncements

ASUs Adopted:

ASU No 2017-04 - “Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment” (“ASU 2017-04”)

In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, which simplifies the accounting for goodwill impairment. The guidance removes Step 2 of the goodwill impairment test, which requires a hypothetical purchase price allocation. A goodwill impairment will now be the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying amount of goodwill. All other goodwill impairment guidance will remain largely unchanged. The amendment is effective for calendar year-end SEC filers in 2020, and early adoption is permitted. The Company early adopted ASU 2017-04 during the first quarter of 2017. The adoption of this standard did not impact the Company’s financial statements.

8

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

ASU No. 2016-09 - “Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting” (“ASU 2016-09”)

In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-09, which is intended to simplify several areas of accounting for share-based compensation arrangements, including the income tax impact, classification on the statement of cash flows and forfeitures. The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. ASU 2016-09, which the Company adopted as of the first quarter of 2017, requires that excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies (including tax benefits of dividends on share-based payment awards) be recognized as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement. The tax effects of exercised or vested awards should be treated as discrete items in the reporting period in which they occur. Excess tax benefits should be recognized regardless of whether the benefit reduces taxes payable in the current period. Previously, the Company followed the guidance that the tax benefit and credit to APIC for a windfall tax benefit should not be recorded until the deduction reduces income taxes payable. The Company has been historically in a net operating loss. Therefore, the windfall tax benefit has not reduced income taxes payable. The new guidance requires all excess tax benefits that were not previously recognized because the related tax deduction had not reduced current taxes payable to be recorded on a modified retrospective basis through a cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the period in which the new guidance is adopted. The financial statement impact of this change resulted in $68.1 million being recorded as a credit to retained earnings as of January 1, 2017. On a prospective basis, the impact of windfalls and shortfalls will be recorded to income tax expense on a discrete basis.

The Company will continue to classify employee taxes paid on the statement of cash flows when an employer withholds shares for tax-withholding purposes as a financing activity. The Company will continue to estimate forfeitures as part of share based compensation expense recognition.

ASU No. 2015-11 - “Inventory (Topic 330): Simplifying the Measurement of Inventory” (“ASU 2015-11”)

In July 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-11, which requires that an entity should measure in-scope inventory at the lower of cost and net realizable value. Net realizable value is the estimated selling price in the ordinary course of business, less reasonably predictable costs of completion, disposal, and transportation. The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The adoption of this standard did not have a material impact on the financial statements.

ASUs Pending Adoption:

ASU No 2017-08 - “Receivables - Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities” (“ASU 2017-08”)

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-08, which shortens the amortization period for certain callable debt securities held at a premium. Specifically, the amendments require the premium to be amortized to the earliest call date. The amendments do not require an accounting change for securities held at a discount; the discount continues to be amortized to maturity. The amendment is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2017-08 may have on its consolidated financial statements and has not elected early adoption as of the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

9

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

ASU No 2017-07 - “Compensation - Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost” (“ASU 2017-07”)

In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-07 primarily to improve the presentation of net periodic pension cost and net periodic postretirement benefit cost. The guidance will require the net benefit cost to be split in the income statement. The service cost component will be included in operating income. The other components, including amortization of past service costs or credits, and settlement and curtailments amounts, will be reported separately outside of operating income. The amendment is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. Early adoption is permitted at the beginning of an annual period (in the first interim period) for which financial statements have not yet been issued. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2017-07 may have on its consolidated financial statements and has not elected early adoption as of the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

ASU No. 2016-18 - “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Restricted Cash (a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force)” (“ASU 2016-18”)

In November 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-18, which requires entities to include in their cash and cash-equivalent balances in the statement of cash flows those amounts that are deemed to be restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents. The ASU does not define the terms “restricted cash” and “restricted cash equivalents.” The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-18 may have on its consolidated financial statements and has not elected early adoption as of the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

ASU No. 2016-16 - “Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory” (“ASU 2016-16”)

In October 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-16, which eliminates the exception for all intra-entity sales of assets other than inventory. As a result, a reporting entity would recognize the tax expense from the sale of the asset in the seller’s tax jurisdiction when the transfer occurs, even though the pre-tax effects of that transaction are eliminated in consolidation. Any deferred tax asset that arises in the buyer’s jurisdiction would also be recognized at the time of the transfer. The new guidance does not apply to intra-entity transfers of inventory. The income tax consequences from the sale of inventory from one member of a consolidated entity to another will continue to be deferred until the inventory is sold to a third party. The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-16 may have on its consolidated financial statements and has not elected early adoption as of the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

ASU No. 2016-15 - “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments” (“ASU 2016-15”)

In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-15, which changes how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-15 may have on its consolidated financial statements and has not elected early adoption as of the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

10

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

ASU No. 2016-02 - “Leases (Topic 842)” (“ASU 2016-02”)

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-02, which amends the accounting treatment for leases. The amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Lessees (for capital and operating leases) and lessors (for sales-type, direct financing, and operating leases) must apply a modified retrospective transition approach for leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements. The modified retrospective approach would not require any transition accounting for leases that expired before the earliest comparative period presented. Lessees and lessors may not apply a full retrospective transition approach. Early adoption is permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-02 may have on its consolidated financial statements and has not elected early adoption as of the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

ASU No. 2016-01 - “Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” (“ASU 2016-01”)

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, which addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. ASU 2016-01 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2017, and early adoption is not permitted. The Company is currently evaluating the impact that the adoption of ASU 2016-01 may have on its consolidated financial statements.

ASU No. 2014-09 - “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)” (“ASU 2014-09”), ASU No. 2015-14 - “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Deferral of the Effective Date” (“ASU 2015-14”), ASU No. 2016-08 - “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Principal versus Agent Considerations” (“ASU 2016-08”), ASU No. 2016-10 - “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing” (“ASU 2016-10”) ASU No. 2016-12 - “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients” (“ASU 2016-12”) and ASU No. 2016-20 - “Technical Corrections and Improvements to Topic 606, Revenue from Contracts with Customers” (“ASU 2016-20”)

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, which applies to any entity that either enters into contracts with customers to transfer goods or services or enters into contracts for the transfer of non-financial assets, unless those contracts are within the scope of other standards, superseding the existing revenue recognition requirements in ASC Topic 605 “Revenue Recognition.” Pursuant to ASU 2014-09, an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange, as applied through a multi-step process to achieve that core principle. Subsequently, the FASB approved a deferral included in ASU 2015-14 that permits public entities to apply the amendments in ASU 2014-09 for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods therein, and that would also permit public entities to elect to adopt the amendments as of the original effective date as applicable to reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The new guidance allows for the amendment to be applied either retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented or retrospectively as a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the date of adoption. In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-08, which clarifies the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-10, which clarifies identifying performance obligations and the licensing implementation guidance. In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-12, which improves certain aspects of ASC Topic 606 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” In December 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-20, which improves certain aspects of ASC Topic 606 “Revenue from Contracts with Customers.” The effective date and transition requirements for ASU 2016-08, ASU 2016-10, ASU 2016-12 and ASU 2016-20 are the same as the effective date and transition requirements of ASU 2014-09 (collectively, “the standard”).

The Company has not early adopted and is still evaluating the impact of the standard in areas such as revenue from the sale of ASICs and custom products and will adopt the standard on a modified retrospective basis on January 1, 2018. See Note 1: “Background and Basis of Presentation” for the impact of the change in revenue recognition on distributor sales.

11

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 3:    Acquisitions and Divestitures

2016 Acquisition

Fairchild

On September 19, 2016, the Company acquired 100% of Fairchild pursuant to the Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Fairchild Agreement”) with each of Fairchild and Falcon Operations Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company, whereby Fairchild became a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. The purchase price totaled $2,532.2 million in cash and was funded by the Company’s borrowings against the Term Loan “B” Facility and a partial draw of the Revolving Credit Facility, as well as with cash on hand.

2016 Sale of Assets

On December 19, 2016, the Company entered into an Asset Purchase Agreement (the “Asset Purchase Agreement”) with HSET Electronic Tech (Hong Kong) Limited to sell inventory and license the technology related to its Mobile CIS business for $75 million. Pursuant to the Asset Purchase Agreement, the proceeds were scheduled to be received in multiple installments in 2017. The Company and HSET Electronic Tech (Hong Kong) entered into the First Amendment (the “First Amendment”) to the Asset Purchase Agreement on April 7, 2017. Pursuant to the First Amendment, payments for inventory will be received upon shipment of products and payments for other intangible assets, including the licenses, will be received in multiple installments on dates later than those established under the Asset Purchase Agreement. Due to the terms of the First Amendment and nature of the delivery and payment schedules, the transaction will not be accounted as a divestiture of a group and will be accounted as individual transactions when the associated deliverables are transferred to the seller. The sale of inventory has been and will be recorded to revenue as production is completed and inventory is shipped. The inventory sold during the quarter ended March 31, 2017 was $10.1 million. Portions of the inventory are under production and the technology assets have been classified as held for sale and included in other current assets in the consolidated balance sheet as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Note 4:    Goodwill and Intangible Assets

Goodwill

The following table summarizes goodwill by relevant reportable segments as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in millions):

There has been no change in the balance of Goodwill from December 31, 2016 to March 31, 2017.

Goodwill is tested for impairment annually on the first day of the fourth quarter unless a triggering event would require an interim analysis. Management did not identify any triggering events through March 31, 2017 that would require an interim impairment analysis.

12

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Intangible Assets

Intangible assets, net, were as follows as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in millions):

During the quarter ended March 31, 2017, the Company completed certain of its IPRD projects, resulting in the reclassification of $15.0 million from IPRD to developed technology. During the quarter ended March 31, 2017, the Company abandoned certain of its previously capitalized IPRD projects and recorded an impairment loss of $4.4 million.

Amortization expense for acquisition-related intangible assets amounted to $29.1 million and $23.7 million for the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016, respectively. Amortization expense for intangible assets, with the exception of the $120.5 million of IPRD assets that will be amortized once the corresponding projects have been completed, is expected to be as follows for remainder of 2017, each of the next four years, and thereafter (in millions):

13

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 5: Restructuring, Asset Impairments and Other, Net

Summarized activity included in the “Restructuring, asset impairments and other, net” caption on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 is as follows (in millions):

Changes in accrued restructuring charges from December 31, 2016 to March 31, 2017 are summarized as follows (in millions):

Activity related to the Company’s restructuring programs that were either initiated during 2017 or had not been completed as of March 31, 2017, is as follows:

Post Fairchild Acquisition Restructuring Costs

On September 19, 2016, following the acquisition of Fairchild, the Company approved the implementation of a cost-reduction plan, the first step of which was to eliminate approximately 130 positions from its workforce as a result of redundancies and position eliminations. During the quarter ended December 31, 2016, another 95 positions were eliminated. During the quarter ended March 31, 2017, another 25 positions were eliminated. The expense was $1.6 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017. During the quarter ended March 31, 2017, $4.6 million was paid for all programs. Accrued severance for this program was $2.5 million as of March 31, 2017 and is expected to be paid by the third quarter of 2017. The total expense for program to date is $27.3 million. The Company will continue to evaluate the remaining positions for redundancies and may incur additional charges in the future.

Manufacturing Relocation

During March 2016, the Company announced a plan to relocate certain of its manufacturing operations to another existing location. During the quarter ended March 31, 2017, the Company made the decision to cancel the plans for relocation and announced all workforce would remain intact. As a result, the accrued balance of $2.1 million was released as of March 31, 2017.    

14

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 6:    Balance Sheet Information

Certain amounts included in the Company’s balance sheet as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 consist of the following (dollars in millions):

As described in Note 1: “Background and Basis of Presentation,” during the quarter ended March 31, 2017, the Company recognized accruals for returns and allowances at the time of recognizing revenue upon shipment to the distributors, which is included in Sales related reserves within accrued expenses.

Assets classified as held for sale, consisting of properties, machinery and equipment, and intangible assets are required to be recorded at the lower of carrying value or fair value less any costs to sell. The carrying value of these assets, as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, was $31.8 million and $34.1 million, respectively, and is reported as other current assets on the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet. The Company expects to dispose of the remaining assets within the next twelve months.

15

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Warranty Reserves

Activity related to the Company’s warranty reserves for the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016 is as follows (in millions):

Defined Benefit Plans

The Company maintains defined benefit plans for certain of its foreign subsidiaries. The Company recognizes the aggregate amount of all overfunded plans as assets and the aggregate amount of all underfunded plans as liabilities in its financial statements. As of March 31, 2017, the total accrued pension liability for underfunded plans was $107.2 million, of which the current portion of $0.1 million was classified as accrued expenses. As of December 31, 2016, the total accrued pension liability for underfunded plans was $102.1 million, of which the current portion of $0.1 million was classified as accrued expenses.

The components of the Company’s net periodic pension expense for the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016 are as follows (in millions):

16

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 7:    Long-Term Debt

The Company’s long-term debt consists of the following (annualized rates, dollars in millions):

17

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Expected maturities relating to the Company’s long-term debt (including current maturities) as of March 31, 2017 are as follows (in millions):

2.625% Notes, Series B

On November 17, 2016, the Company announced that it would be exercising its option to redeem the entire $356.9 million outstanding principal amount of the 2.625% Notes, Series B on December 20, 2016 pursuant to the terms of the indenture governing the 2.625% Notes, Series B. The holders of the 2.625% Notes, Series B had the right to convert their 2.625% Notes, Series B into shares of common stock of the Company at a conversion rate of 95.2381 shares per $1,000 principal amount until the close of business on December 19, 2016, which was equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $10.50 per share of common stock. The Company, at its election, could settle its conversion obligation with respect to the 2.625% Notes, Series B, with shares of common stock, cash or a combination thereof. The Company satisfied its obligation with respect to the 2.625% Notes, Series B tendered for conversion with cash. The final conversion was settled on January 26, 2017, resulting in an aggregate payment of approximately $445.0 million for the redemption and conversion of the 2.625% Notes, Series B. The equity component of the 2.625% Notes, Series B amounting to $32.9 million, representing the amounts previously recorded to additional paid-in capital was reclassified to mezzanine equity as of December 31, 2016. There was no loss on extinguishment of debt, and upon settlement, the balance in the mezzanine equity was cleared and the remaining $55.7 million was recorded as a reduction to additional paid-in capital.

1.625% Notes due 2023

On March 31, 2017, the Company completed a private placement of $575.0 million of its 1.625% Notes to qualified institutional buyers pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act. The Company incurred issuance costs of $13.7 million in connection with the issuance of the 1.625% Notes, of which $11.1 million was capitalized as debt issuance costs and is being amortized using the effective interest method and $2.6 million was allocated to the conversion option (as further described below) and was recorded as equity. The 1.625% Notes are governed by an indenture (the “1.625% Indenture”) between the Company, the guarantors party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as trustee.

The net proceeds from the offering of the 1.625% Notes were used to repay $562.1 million of borrowings outstanding under the Term Loan “B” Facility. The 1.625% Notes bear interest at the rate of 1.625% per year from the date of issuance, payable semiannually in arrears on April 15 and October 15 of each year, beginning on October 15, 2017. The 1.625% Notes are fully and unconditionally guaranteed, on a joint and several basis, by each of the Company’s subsidiaries that is a borrower or guarantor under the Credit Agreement.

18

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

The initial conversion rate of the 1.625% Notes is 48.2567 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 1.625% Notes (subject to adjustment in certain events), which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $20.72 per share of common stock. Prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding July 15, 2023, the 1.625% Notes will be convertible only under the following circumstances: (1) during any calendar quarter commencing after the calendar quarter ending on June 30, 2017 (and only during such calendar quarter), if the last reported sale price of the Company’s common stock for at least 20 trading days (whether or not consecutive) during the period of 30 consecutive trading days ending on the last trading day of the immediately preceding calendar quarter is greater than or equal to 130% of the conversion price on each applicable trading day; (2) during the five business day period after any five consecutive trading day period in which the trading price per $1,000 principal amount of the 1.625% Notes for each trading day of such period was less than 98% of the product of the last reported sale price of the Company’s common stock and the conversion rate on each such trading day; or (3) upon the occurrence of specified corporate transactions described in the 1.625% Indenture. On or after July 15, 2023, until the close of business on the second scheduled trading day immediately preceding the maturity date, holders of the 1.625% Notes may convert all or a portion of their 1.625% Notes at any time. Upon conversion of the 1.625% Notes, the Company will deliver cash, shares of its common stock or a combination of cash and shares of its common stock, at the Company’s election. For a discussion of the dilutive effects for earnings per share calculations, see Note 8: “Earnings Per Share and Equity.”

The 1.625% Notes will mature on October 15, 2023. If a holder elects to convert its 1.625% Notes in connection with the occurrence of specified fundamental changes that occur prior to July 15, 2023, the holder will be entitled to receive, in addition to cash and/or shares of common stock equal to the conversion rate, an additional number of shares of common stock, as described in the 1.625% Indenture. Notwithstanding these conversion rate adjustments, the 1.625% Notes contain an explicit limit on the number of shares issuable upon conversion.

In connection with the occurrence of specified fundamental changes, holders may require the Company to repurchase for cash all or a portion of their 1.625% Notes at a purchase price equal to 100% of the principal amount of the 1.625% Notes to be repurchased, plus accrued and unpaid interest to, but not including, the fundamental change repurchase date.

The 1.625% Notes, which are the Company’s unsecured obligations, rank equally in right of payment to all of the Company’s existing and future unsubordinated indebtedness and are senior in right of payment to all of the Company’s existing and future subordinated obligations. The 1.625% Notes are effectively subordinated to any of the Company’s or its subsidiaries’ secured indebtedness to the extent of the value of the assets securing such indebtedness.

In accordance with accounting guidance on embedded conversion features, the Company valued and bifurcated the conversion option associated with the 1.625% Notes from the respective host debt instrument, which is referred to as the debt discount, and initially recorded the conversion option of $115.7 million in stockholders’ equity. The resulting debt discount is being amortized to interest expense at an effective interest rate of 5.38% over the contractual terms of the notes.

Included as a reduction of gross long-term debt as of March 31, 2017, were $11.1 million of debt issuance costs associated with the 1.625% Notes, which are being amortized using the effective interest method.

Included as a reduction of gross long term debt as of March 31, 2017, was $115.7 million of unamortized debt discount associated with the 1.625% Notes, which will be amortized using the effective interest method. Concurrently with the offering of the 1.625% Notes, the Company used $59.5 million of borrowings under the Revolving Credit Facility to enter into convertible note hedge and warrant transactions with certain of the initial purchasers of the 1.625% Notes.

Pursuant to these transactions, the Company has the option to purchase (subject to adjustment for certain specified transactions) an aggregate of 27.7 million shares of its common stock at a price of $20.72 per share. The total cost of the convertible note hedge transactions was $144.7 million. In addition, the Company sold warrants to certain bank counterparties whereby the holders of the warrants have the option to purchase initially (subject to adjustment for certain specified events) a total of 27.7 million shares of the Company’s common stock at a price of $30.70 per share. The Company received $85.2 million in cash proceeds from the sale of these warrants.

19

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Together, the purchase of the convertible note hedges and the sale of the warrants are intended to offset potential dilution from the conversion of the 1.625% Notes. As these transactions meet certain accounting criteria, the convertible note hedges and warrants are recorded in stockholders’ equity and are not accounted for as derivatives. The net cost incurred in connection with the convertible note hedge and warrant transactions was recorded as a reduction to additional paid in capital in the consolidated balance sheet. A portion of the shares subject to the conversion of the 1.625% Notes and hedging transactions were reserved from the Company’s unallocated shares.

Second Amendment to Credit Agreement

On March 31, 2017, the Company and certain of the Company’s subsidiaries, as guarantors (the “Guarantors”), entered into the Second Amendment (the “Second Amendment”) to the Credit Agreement, dated as of April 15, 2016, as amended by the First Amendment (the “First Amendment”) thereto, dated as of September 30, 2016, with the several lenders party thereto, Deutsche Bank AG New York Branch, as administrative agent (the “Agent”), Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated, BMO Capital Markets Corp., HSBC Securities (USA) Inc. and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as joint lead arrangers and joint bookrunners, Barclays Bank PLC, Compass Bank, The Bank of Tokyo-Mitsubishi UFJ, Ltd., Morgan Stanley Senior Funding, Inc., BOKF, NA and KBC Bank N.V., as co-managers, and HSBC Bank USA, N.A. and Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, as co-documentation agents (as amended by the First Amendment and Second Amendment, the “Credit Agreement”).

The Second Amendment provides for, among other things, modifications to the Credit Agreement to allow the 1.625% Notes to rank pari passu with borrowings under the Credit Agreement and to reduce the interest rates payable under the term loan “B” facility (the “Term Loan “B” Facility”) and the revolving credit facility (the “Revolving Credit Facility”) .

Borrowings under the Credit Agreement may be incurred in U.S. Dollars, Euros, Pounds Sterling, Japanese Yen or any other currency approved by the Agent and the lenders under the Revolving Credit Facility, subject to certain qualifications described in the Credit Agreement. Regardless of currency, all borrowings under the Credit Agreement, may, at the Company’s option, be incurred as either eurocurrency loans (“Eurocurrency Loans”) or alternate base rate loans (“ABR Loans”).

Pursuant to the Credit Agreement, for any interest period ending after the date of the Second Amendment, Eurocurrency Loans will accrue interest at (i) a base rate per annum equal to the Adjusted LIBO Rate (as defined below) plus (ii) an applicable margin equal to (x) 1.75% with respect to borrowings under the Revolving Credit Facility (with step-downs and step-ups as set forth in the Credit Agreement) or (y) 2.25% with respect to borrowings under the Term Loan “B” Facility.

Pursuant to the Credit Agreement, ABR Loans will accrue interest at (i) a base rate per annum equal to the highest of (x) the Federal funds rate plus 0.50%, (y) the prime commercial lending rate announced by Deutsche Bank AG, New York Branch from time to time as its prime lending rate and (z) the Adjusted LIBO Rate for a one month interest period (or if such day is not a business day, the immediately preceding business day) (determined after giving effect to any applicable “floor”) plus 1.00%; provided that, the Adjusted LIBO Rate for any day shall be based on the LIBO Rate (as defined below), subject to the interest rate floors set forth in the Credit Agreement, plus (ii) an applicable margin equal to (x) 0.75% with respect to borrowings under the Revolving Credit Facility (with step-downs and step-ups as set forth in the Credit Agreement) or (y) 1.25% with respect to borrowings under the Term Loan “B” Facility.

The obligations under the Credit Agreement are guaranteed by the Guarantors and collateralized by a pledge of substantially all of the assets of the Company and the Guarantors, including a pledge of the equity interests in certain of the Company’s domestic and first tier foreign subsidiaries, subject to customary exceptions. The obligations under the Credit Agreement are also collateralized by mortgage on certain real property assets of the Company and its domestic subsidiaries.

The Credit Agreement includes financial maintenance covenants including a maximum consolidated total net leverage ratio and a minimum interest coverage ratio in relation to the Revolving Credit Facility. It also contains other customary affirmative and negative covenants and events of default. The Company was in compliance with its covenants under the Credit Agreement as of March 31, 2017.

20

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Debt prepayment, issuance costs

The Company incurred legal and other fees of $2.4 million related to Second Amendment. The Company performed a debt extinguishment vs modification analysis on a lender by lender basis upon the execution of the Second Amendment and recorded a debt extinguishment charge of $5.6 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2017, which included a $3.2 million write off of unamortized debt issuance costs and $2.4 million in third party fees.

On March 31, 2017, the Company used the proceeds from the issuance of the 1.625% Notes amounting to $562.1 million and cash on hand of $12.9 million to prepay $575 million of the outstanding balance of the Term Loan “B” Facility and recorded a loss on debt prepayment amounting to $20.6 million representing the proportionate write-off of unamortized debt issuance costs.

Note 8:    Earnings Per Share and Equity

Earnings Per Share

Calculations of net income per common share attributable to ON Semiconductor are as follows (in millions, except per share data):

Basic Net income per common share attributable to ON Semiconductor Corporation is computed by dividing Net income attributable to ON Semiconductor Corporation by the Basic weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the period.

The number of incremental shares from the assumed exercise of stock options and assumed issuance of shares relating to restricted stock units is calculated by applying the treasury stock method. Share-based awards whose impact is considered to be anti-dilutive under the treasury stock method were excluded from the diluted net income per share calculation. The excluded number of anti-dilutive share-based awards was 0.9 million and 4.9 million for the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016, respectively.

The dilutive impact related to the Company’s 1.00% Notes and 1.625% Notes is determined in accordance with the net share settlement requirements prescribed by ASC Topic 260, Earnings Per Share. Under the net share settlement calculation, the Company’s convertible notes are assumed to be convertible into cash up to the par value, with the excess of par value being convertible into common stock. A dilutive effect occurs when the stock price exceeds the conversion price for each series of the convertible notes. In periods when the share price is lower than the conversion price, the impact is anti-dilutive and therefore has no impact on the Company’s earnings per share calculations. Additionally, if the average price of the Company’s common stock exceeds $25.96 per share, with respect to the 1.00% Notes, or $30.70 per share, with respect to the 1.625% Notes, for a reporting period, the Company will also include the effect of the additional potential shares, using the treasury stock method, that may be issued related to the warrants that were issued concurrently with the issuance of the 1.00% Notes and 1.625% Notes, respectively. Prior to conversion, the convertible note hedges are not considered for purposes of the earnings per share calculations, as their effect would be anti-dilutive. Upon conversion, the convertible note hedges are expected to offset the dilutive effect of the 1.00% Notes and 1.625% Notes, respectively, when the stock price is above $18.50 per share, with respect to the 1.00% Notes, and $20.72 per share, with respect to the 1.625% Notes.

21

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Equity

Share Repurchase Program

Information relating to the Company’s share repurchase program during the quarter ended March 31, 2017 is as follows (in millions, except per share data):

Shares for Restricted Stock Units Tax Withholding

Treasury stock is recorded at cost and is presented as a reduction of stockholders’ equity in the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements. Shares, with a fair market value equal to the applicable statutory minimum amount of the employee withholding taxes due, are withheld by the Company upon the vesting of restricted stock units to pay the applicable statutory minimum amount of employee withholding taxes and are considered common stock repurchases. The Company then pays the applicable statutory minimum amount of withholding taxes in cash. The amount remitted for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, was $13.0 million, for which the Company withheld 0.9 million shares of common stock that were underlying the restricted stock units that vested. The amount remitted for the quarter ended April 1, 2016 was $8.0 million, for which the Company withheld less than 0.9 million shares of common stock, that were underlying the restricted stock units that vested. None of these shares had been reissued or retired as of March 31, 2017; however, these shares may be reissued or retired by the Company at a later date.

Non-Controlling Interest

The Company’s entity which operates assembly and test operations in Leshan, China is owned by a joint venture company, Leshan-Phoenix Semiconductor Company Limited (“Leshan”). The Company owns a majority of the outstanding equity interests in Leshan, and the Company’s investment in Leshan has been consolidated in its financial statements.

At December 31, 2016, the non-controlling interest balance was $21.8 million. This balance increased to $22.3 million as of March 31, 2017, resulting from the non-controlling interest’s $0.5 million share of the earnings for the quarter ended March 31, 2017, as compared to $24.1 million as of April 1, 2016 due to the non-controlling interest’s $0.4 million share of the earnings for the quarter ended April 1, 2016.

22

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 9:    Share-Based Compensation

Total share-based compensation expense related to the Company’s employee stock options, restricted stock units, stock grant awards and ESPP for the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016 was comprised as follows (in millions):

As of March 31, 2017, total estimated unrecognized share-based compensation expense, net of estimated forfeitures, related to non-vested stock options granted prior to that date was $0.1 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1 month. As of March 31, 2017, total estimated unrecognized share-based compensation expense, net of estimated forfeitures, related to non-vested restricted stock units with time-based service conditions and performance-based vesting criteria granted prior to that date was $109.8 million, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.16 years. The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised during the quarter ended March 31, 2017 was $5.8 million. The Company recorded cash received from the exercise of stock options of $7.5 million during the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

Share-based compensation expense recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income is based on awards that are ultimately expected to vest. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. The annualized pre-vesting forfeiture rate for stock options was estimated to be 11% during the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016. The annualized pre-vesting forfeiture rate for restricted stock units was estimated to be 5% during the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016.

Shares Available

As of December 31, 2016, there was an aggregate of 19.8 million shares of common stock available for grant under the Company’s Amended and Restated SIP and 4.9 million shares available for issuance under the ESPP. As of March 31, 2017, there was an aggregate of 14.0 million shares of common stock available for grant under the Amended and Restated SIP and 4.3 million shares available for issuance under the ESPP.

23

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Stock Options

Summarized stock option information for the three months ended March 31, 2017 is as follows (in millions, except per share and contractual term data):

Additional information with respect to stock options outstanding as of March 31, 2017, with exercise prices less than or above $15.49 per share, the closing price of the Company’s common stock at March 31, 2017, is as follows (number of shares in millions):

Restricted Stock Units

Restricted stock units generally vest over three years with service-based requirements or performance-based requirements or a combination of service-based and performance-based requirements and are payable in shares of the Company’s common stock upon vesting. The following table presents summarized information with respect to the Company’s restricted stock units as of March 31, 2017 and changes during the quarter ended March 31, 2017 (number of shares in millions):

24

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 10:    Commitments and Contingencies

Leases

The following represents future minimum lease obligations under non-cancelable operating leases as of March 31, 2017 (in millions):

Environmental Contingencies

The Company’s headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona is located on property that is a “Superfund” site, which is a property listed on the National Priorities List and subject to clean-up activities under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”). Motorola and Freescale have been involved in the cleanup of on-site solvent contaminated soil and groundwater and off-site contaminated groundwater pursuant to consent decrees with the State of Arizona. As part of the Company’s August 4, 1999 recapitalization (the “Recapitalization”), Motorola retained responsibility for this contamination, and Motorola and Freescale have agreed to indemnify the Company with respect to remediation costs and other costs or liabilities related to this matter.

As part of the Recapitalization, the Company received various manufacturing facilities, one of which is located in the Czech Republic. In regards to this site, the Company has ongoing remediation projects to respond to releases of hazardous substances that occurred prior to the Recapitalization during the years that this facility was operated by government-owned entities. In each case, the remediation project consists primarily of monitoring groundwater wells located on-site and off-site with additional action plans developed to respond in the event activity levels are exceeded at each of the respective locations. The government of the Czech Republic has agreed to indemnify the Company and the respective subsidiaries, subject to specified limitations, for remediation costs associated with this historical contamination. Based upon the information available, total future remediation costs to the Company are not expected to be material.

The Company’s design center in East Greenwich, Rhode Island is located on property that has localized soil contamination. In connection with the purchase of the facility, the Company entered into a settlement agreement and covenant not to sue with the State of Rhode Island. This agreement requires that remedial actions be undertaken and a quarterly groundwater monitoring program be initiated by the former owners of the property. Based on the information available, any costs to the Company in connection with this matter have not been, and are not expected to be, material.

As a result of the acquisition of AMIS, the Company is a “primary responsible party” to an environmental remediation and cleanup at AMIS’s former corporate headquarters in Santa Clara, California. Costs incurred by AMIS have included implementation of the clean-up plan, operations and maintenance of remediation systems, and other project management costs. However, AMIS’s former parent company, a subsidiary of Nippon Mining, contractually agreed to indemnify AMIS and the Company for any obligations relating to environmental remediation and cleanup at this location. Based on the information available, any costs to the Company in connection with this matter have not been, and are not expected to be, material.

The Company’s former front-end manufacturing location in Aizu, Japan is located on property where soil and ground water contamination have been detected. The Company believes that the contamination originally occurred during a time when the facility was operated by a prior owner. The Company has worked with local authorities to implement a remediation plan and expects remaining remediation costs to be covered by insurance. Based on information available, any costs to the Company in connection with this matter have not been, and are not expected to be, material.

25

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Through its acquisition of Fairchild, the Company acquired facilities in South Portland, Maine and West Jordan, Utah. These two facilities have ongoing environmental remediation projects to respond to certain releases of hazardous substances that occurred prior to the leveraged recapitalization of Fairchild from its former parent company, National Semiconductor Corporation, which is now owned by Texas Instruments, Inc. Although the Company may incur certain liabilities with respect to these remediation projects, pursuant to the asset purchase agreement entered into in connection with the Fairchild recapitalization, National Semiconductor Corporation agreed to indemnify Fairchild, without limitation and for an indefinite period of time, for all future costs related to these projects. Additionally, under the 1999 asset purchase agreement pursuant to which Fairchild purchased the power device business of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (“Samsung”), Samsung agreed to indemnify Fairchild in an amount up to $150.0 million for remediation costs and other liabilities related to historical contamination at Samsung’s Bucheon, South Korea operations. The costs incurred to respond to the above conditions and projects have not been, and are not expected to be, material, and any future payments the Company makes in connection with such liabilities are not expected to be material and are not expected to have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or statements of cash flows.

The Company was notified by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) that it has been identified as a “potentially responsible party” (“PRP”) under CERCLA in the Chemetco Superfund matter. Chemetco is a defunct reclamation services supplier who operated in Illinois at what is now a Superfund site. The Company used Chemetco for reclamation services. The EPA is pursuing Chemetco customers for contribution to the site cleanup activities. The Company has joined a PRP group which is cooperating with the EPA in the evaluation and funding of the cleanup. Based on the information available, any costs to the Company in connection with this matter have not been, and are not expected to be, material.

Financing Contingencies

In the ordinary course of business, the Company provides standby letters of credit or other guarantee instruments to certain parties initiated by either the Company or its subsidiaries, as required for transactions such as, but not limited to, material purchase commitments, agreements to mitigate collection risk, leases, utilities or customs guarantees. As of March 31, 2017, the Company’s Revolving Credit Facility included $15.0 million of availability for the issuance of letters of credit. There were no letters of credit outstanding under the Revolving Credit Facility as of March 31, 2017. The Company also had outstanding guarantees and letters of credit outside of its Revolving Credit Facility totaling $6.8 million as of March 31, 2017.

As part of obtaining financing in the ordinary course of business, the Company issued guarantees related to certain of its capital lease obligations, equipment financing, lines of credit and real estate mortgages, which totaled $129.2 million as of March 31, 2017. The Company is also a guarantor of SCI LLC’s non-collateralized loan with SMBC, which had a balance of $151.0 million as of March 31, 2017. See Note 7: “Long-Term Debt” for additional information.

Based on historical experience and information currently available, the Company believes that it will not be required to make payments under the standby letters of credit or guarantee arrangements for the foreseeable future.

Indemnification Contingencies

The Company is a party to a variety of agreements entered into in the ordinary course of business pursuant to which it may be obligated to indemnify the other parties for certain liabilities that arise out of or relate to the subject matter of the agreements. Some of the agreements entered into by the Company require it to indemnify the other party against losses due to IP infringement, property damage including environmental contamination, personal injury, failure to comply with applicable laws, the Company’s negligence or willful misconduct, or breach of representations and warranties and covenants related to such matters as title to sold assets.

The Company faces risk of exposure to warranty and product liability claims in the event that its products fail to perform as expected or such failure of its products results, or is alleged to result, in economic damage, bodily injury or property damage. In addition, if any of the Company’s designed products are alleged to be defective, the Company may be required to participate in their recall. Depending on the significance of any particular customer and other relevant factors, the Company may agree to provide more favorable rights to such customer for valid defective product claims.

26

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

The Company and its subsidiaries provide for indemnification of directors, officers and other persons in accordance with limited liability agreements, certificates of incorporation, by-laws, articles of association or similar organizational documents, as the case may be. The Company maintains directors’ and officers’ insurance, which should enable it to recover a portion of any future amounts paid.

The Fairchild Agreement provides for indemnification and insurance rights in favor of Fairchild’s then current and former directors, officers and employees. Specifically, the Company has agreed that, for no fewer than six years following the Fairchild acquisition, (a) it will indemnify and hold harmless each such indemnitee against losses and expenses (including advancement of attorneys’ fees and expenses) in connection with any proceeding asserted against the indemnified party in connection with such person’s servings as a director, officer, employee or other fiduciary of Fairchild or its subsidiaries prior to the effective time of the acquisition, (b) it will maintain in effect all provisions of the certificate of incorporation or bylaws of Fairchild or any of its subsidiaries or any other agreements of Fairchild or any of its subsidiaries with any indemnified party regarding elimination of liability, indemnification of officers, directors and employees and advancement of expenses in existence on the date of the Fairchild Agreement for acts or omissions occurring prior to the effective time of the acquisition and (c) subject to certain qualifications, it will provide to Fairchild’s then current directors and officers an insurance and indemnification policy that provides coverage for events occurring prior to the effective time of the acquisition that is no less favorable than Fairchild’s then-existing policy, or, if insurance coverage that is no less favorable is unavailable, the best available coverage.

While the Company’s future obligations under certain agreements may contain limitations on liability for indemnification, other agreements do not contain such limitations and under such agreements it is not possible to predict the maximum potential amount of future payments due to the conditional nature of the Company’s obligations and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular agreement. Historically, payments made by the Company under any of these indemnities have not had a material effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. Additionally, the Company does not believe that any amounts that it may be required to pay under these indemnities in the future will be material to the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Legal Matters

From time to time, the Company is party to various legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business, including indemnification claims, claims of alleged infringement of patents, trademarks, copyrights and other intellectual property rights, claims of alleged non-compliance with contract provisions and claims related to alleged violations of laws and regulations. The Company regularly evaluates the status of the legal proceedings in which it is involved to assess whether a loss is probable or there is a reasonable possibility that a loss, or an additional loss, may have been incurred and determine if accruals are appropriate. If accruals are not appropriate, the Company further evaluates each legal proceeding to assess whether an estimate of possible loss or range of possible loss can be made for disclosure. Although litigation is inherently unpredictable, the Company believes that it has adequate provisions for any probable and estimable losses. It is possible, nevertheless, that the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity could be materially and adversely affected in any particular period by the resolution of a legal proceeding. The Company’s estimates do not represent its maximum exposure. Legal expenses related to defense, negotiations, settlements, rulings and advice of outside legal counsel are expensed as incurred.

The Company is currently involved in a variety of legal matters that arise in the ordinary course of business. Based on information currently available, except as disclosed below, the Company is not involved in any pending or threatened legal proceedings that it believes could reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations or liquidity. The litigation process and the administrative process at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) are inherently uncertain, and the Company cannot guarantee that the outcome of these matters will be favorable to it.

Patent Litigation with Power Integrations, Inc.

There are eight outstanding civil litigation proceedings with Power Integrations, Inc. (“PI”), five of which were pending between PI and Fairchild prior to the acquisition of Fairchild. The Company is vigorously defending the lawsuits filed by PI and believes that it has strong defenses. There are also nine outstanding administrative proceedings in which the Company is challenging the validity of PI patents at the USPTO.

27

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

The outcome of any litigation is inherently uncertain and difficult to predict. Any estimate or statement in this Form 10-Q regarding any reserve or the estimated range of possible losses is made solely in compliance with applicable GAAP requirements, and is not a statement or admission that the Company is or should be liable in any amount, or that any arguments, motions or appeals before any Court lack merit or are subject to impeachment. To the contrary, the Company believes that it has significant and meritorious grounds for judgment in its favor with respect to all of the PI cases and that the Company’s appeals or motions currently pending at the district court level will significantly reduce or eliminate all prior adverse jury verdicts. Subject to the foregoing, as of the date of the filing of this Form 10-Q, the Company estimates its range of possible losses for all PI cases to be between approximately $4 million and $20 million.

Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. et al. (October 20, 2004, Delaware, 1:04-cv-01371-LPS): PI filed this lawsuit in 2004 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against Fairchild and its wholly owned subsidiary, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, alleging that certain of Fairchild’s pulse width modulation (“PWM”) integrated circuit products infringed four PI U.S. patents and seeking a permanent injunction preventing Fairchild from manufacturing, selling or offering the products for sale in the United States, or from importing the products into the United States, as well as money damages for past infringement. In October 2006, a jury returned a verdict finding that 33 of Fairchild’s PWM products willfully infringed one or more of seven claims asserted in the four patents and assessed damages against Fairchild. Fairchild voluntarily stopped U.S. sales and importation of those products in 2007 and has been offering replacement products since 2006. In December 2008, the judge overseeing the case reduced the jury’s 2006 damages award from $34.0 million to approximately $6.1 million and ordered a new trial on the issue of willfulness. Following the new trial held in June 2009, the court found Fairchild’s infringement to have been willful, and in January 2011 the court awarded PI final damages in the amount of $12.2 million. Fairchild appealed the final damages award, willfulness finding, and other issues to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In March 2013, the Court of Appeals vacated almost the entire damages award, ruling that there was no basis upon which a reasonable jury could find Fairchild liable for induced infringement. The Court of Appeals also vacated the earlier judgment of willful patent infringement. The full Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of the United States have since denied PI’s request to review the Court of Appeals ruling. The Court of Appeals instructed the lower court to conduct further proceedings to determine damages based on approximately $500,000 to $750,000 worth of sales and imports of affected products, and this case remains in the District Court of Delaware on that basis. The Company believes that damages on the basis of that level of infringing activity would not be material. PI has further requested the lower court to reinstate the earlier judgment of willful infringement, and that request remains pending with the court.

Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. et al. (May 23, 2008, Delaware, 1:08-cv-00309-LPS): This lawsuit was initiated by PI in 2008 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware against Fairchild, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and its wholly owned subsidiary, System General Corporation (now named Fairchild (Taiwan) Corporation), alleging infringement of three patents. Of the three patents asserted in this lawsuit, two had been asserted against Fairchild and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation in the October 2004 lawsuit described above. In 2011, PI added a fourth patent to this case. On October 14, 2008, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and System General Corporation filed a patent infringement lawsuit against PI in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging that certain PWM integrated circuit products infringe one or more of two U.S. patents owned by System General Corporation. The lawsuit sought monetary damages and an injunction preventing the manufacture, use, sale, offer for sale or importation of PI products found to infringe the asserted patents. The lawsuits were consolidated and heard together in a jury trial in April 2012, during which the jury found that PI infringed one of the two U.S. patents owned by Fairchild (Taiwan) Corporation and upheld the validity of both of the System General Corporation patents. In the same verdict, the jury found that Fairchild infringed two of four U.S. patents asserted by PI and that Fairchild had induced its customers to infringe the asserted patents. (The court later ruled that Fairchild infringed one other asserted PI patent that the jury found was not infringed.) The jury also upheld the validity of the asserted PI patents. On June 30, 2014, the court issued an order enjoining Fairchild from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing into the United States the products found to infringe the PI patents as well as certain products that were similar to the products found to infringe. Willfulness and damages will be determined in the next phase of the case, which has yet to be scheduled. Fairchild and PI appealed the liability phase of this trial to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which heard arguments in July 2016 and issued a decision in December 2016. In the decision, the appeals court vacated the jury’s finding that Fairchild induced infringement of PI’s patents, held that one of PI’s patents was invalid, vacated the permanent injunction against Fairchild, reversed the jury’s finding that PI infringed the Fairchild (Taiwan) Corporation patent, and remanded the case back to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with these rulings.

28

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor International Inc. et al. (November 4, 2009, Northern District of California, 3:09-cv-05235-MMC): In 2009, PI sued Fairchild in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging that several of Fairchild’s products infringe three of PI’s patents. Fairchild filed counterclaims asserting that PI infringed two Fairchild patents. A trial was held in February 2014 on two PI patents and one Fairchild patent. In March 2014, the jury found that Fairchild willfully infringed both PI patents, awarding PI $105.0 million in damages and finding that PI did not infringe the Fairchild patent. Both parties filed various post-trial motions, which were denied by the court with the exception of Fairchild’s motion to set aside the jury’s determination that it acted willfully. In September 2014, the court granted Fairchild’s motion and determined that, as a matter of law, Fairchild’s actions were not willful. Fairchild continued to challenge several other aspects of the verdict during post-trial review. Specifically, Fairchild asserted that the damages award included legal and evidentiary defects that were inconsistent with recent rulings by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. In November 2014, the trial court ruled that the jury lacked sufficient evidence on which to base its damages award and, consequently, vacated the $105.0 million verdict and ordered a second trial on damages. In February 2015, the court denied PI’s request to enjoin the Fairchild products that were found to infringe, finding, among other things, that the evidence at trial failed to establish a causal connection between the alleged harm and the alleged infringement. The court ruled that PI could request an injunction after the second trial on damages, but PI has since indicated that it no longer intends to pursue a permanent injunction. The second damages trial was held in December 2015. In December 2015, a jury awarded PI $139.8 million in damages. Fairchild filed a number of post-trial motions challenging the verdict on several grounds, including several that are similar to challenges to the earlier damages verdict in the case, and the court ruled against Fairchild on these motions and awarded PI approximately $7 million in pre-judgment interest. Following the court’s rulings on these issues, PI moved the court for the enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees in January 2016, and Fairchild opposed that motion. On January 23, 2017 the court reinstated the jury’s willful infringement finding from March 2014, but denied PI’s motion for enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees in its entirety. The Company has filed a notice of appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with respect to the current damages award as well as the 2014 verdict finding that PI’s patents were infringed and valid. On March 27, 2017, the Company filed a motion with the trial court to stay execution of judgment and waive a requirement to post a supersedeas bond. In connection with that motion, the Company asked the trial court to hear the motion on an expedited basis. On March 29, 2017, the trial court denied the request to expedite a hearing and entered an order temporarily staying execution of its judgment pending resolution of the motion to stay execution of judgment. All claims of the two PI patents found to be infringed by Fairchild are also under review in already-instituted inter partes administrative proceedings at the USPTO.

Fairchild Semiconductor International Inc. et al. v. Power Integrations (May 1, 2012, Delaware, 1:12-cv-00540-LPS): In May 2012, Fairchild sued PI in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. The lawsuit accuses PI’s LinkSwitch-PH LED power conversion products of violating three of Fairchild’s patents. PI filed counterclaims of patent infringement against Fairchild, asserting five PI patents. Of those five patents, the court granted Fairchild summary judgment of no infringement on one, PI voluntarily withdrew a second and was forced to remove a third patent during the trial, which began in May 2015. In June 2015, the jury found that PI induced infringement of Fairchild’s patent rights and awarded Fairchild $2.4 million in damages. The same jury found that Fairchild infringed a PI patent and awarded PI damages of $100,000. Following the issuance of the December 2016 appeals court decision in the litigation filed in Delaware in 2008 as described above, PI has asked the court in this action (which is the same court as the 2008 Delaware case) to vacate the jury’s finding that PI infringed Fairchild’s patent due to overlapping legal issues already decided by the appeals court. The Company continues to investigate the applicability of the December 2016 appeals court decision to this action as it may reduce Fairchild’s liability regarding the PI patent that the jury found Fairchild infringed.

Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor International Inc. et al. (October 21, 2015, Northern District of California, 3:15-cv-04854 MMC): In 2015, PI filed another complaint for patent infringement against Fairchild in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleging Fairchild’s switch mode power supply products willfully infringed two PI patents related to frequency jitter and light load frequency reduction. In the complaint, PI is seeking a permanent injunction, unspecified damages, a trebling of damages, and an accounting of costs and fees. Fairchild answered and counterclaimed, alleging infringement by PI of four Fairchild patents related to aspects of PI’s power conversion products. The lawsuit is in its earliest stages, and has been stayed pending the outcome of the Company’s administrative challenges to the two PI patents asserted against Fairchild.

29

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

ON Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC v. Power Integrations, Inc. (August 11, 2016, Arizona, 2:16-cv-02720-SPL): The Company and SCI LLC (collectively “ON Semi”), filed a lawsuit against PI in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. In the lawsuit, ON Semi is asserting claims of patent infringement on six of its patents related to aspects of PI’s power conversion products. In the complaint, ON Semi is seeking a permanent injunction, unspecified damages, a trebling of damages, and an accounting of costs and fees. The lawsuit also seeks a claim for a declaratory judgment for ON Semi of non-infringement of three of PI’s patents. All three of the PI patents at issue in the declaratory judgment claims are subject to ON Semi’s administrative challenges to those patents currently pending at the USPTO. PI has not yet answered the complaint, but instead has moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and venue or, alternatively, to transfer the lawsuit to the Northern District of California based on the lawsuit filed on November 1, 2016 (described below). The lawsuit is in its earliest stages.

Power Integrations v. ON Semiconductor Corporation, and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC (November 1, 2016, Northern District of California, 3:16-cv-06371-BLF): This lawsuit was initiated by PI in 2016 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California against ON Semi, alleging infringement of six PI patents. Of the six PI patents asserted in this lawsuit, two overlap with ON Semi’s declaratory judgment claims in the August 2016 lawsuit in Arizona and are subject to ON Semi’s administrative challenges to those patents currently pending at the USPTO. In the complaint, PI alleges infringement and seeks a permanent injunction, unspecified damages, treble damages, and an accounting of costs and fees. The Northern District of California has currently stayed this lawsuit pending the District of Arizona’s decision on PI’s motion to transfer the Arizona lawsuit (described above) to this forum.

ON Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC v. Power Integrations, Inc. (December 27, 2016, Eastern District of Texas, 2:16-cv-01451-JRG-RSP): ON Semi filed a lawsuit against PI in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, asserting claims of patent infringement on six of its patents directed to aspects of PI’s InnoSwitch family of products. In the complaint, ON Semi sought a permanent injunction, unspecified damages, treble damages, and an accounting of costs and fees. On March 9, 2017, this lawsuit was dismissed without prejudice contemporaneous with the filing of a new lawsuit in the District of Delaware concerning the same patents.

ON Semiconductor Corporation and Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC v. Power Integrations, Inc. (March 9, 2017, District of Delaware, 1:17-cv-00247-LPS-CJB): ON Semi filed a lawsuit against PI in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, asserting asserted claims of patent infringement on six of its patents directed to aspects of PI’s InnoSwitch family of products. In the complaint, ON Semi is seeking a permanent injunction, unspecified damages, treble damages and an accounting of costs and fees. PI has not yet answered the complaint, but instead has moved to dismiss the case for failure to state a claim. The lawsuit is in its earliest stages.

Administrative Challenges to PI’s Patents

Between March and August 2016, SCI LLC petitioned the USPTO to institute 12 inter partes reviews, each requesting cancellation of certain claims of six patents owned by PI that have been asserted against the Company, SCI LLC and Fairchild. The USPTO has instituted an inter partes trial, has indicated that SCI LLC is likely to prevail in showing that the challenged claims are unpatentable in nine out of the 12 petitions it has reviewed so far. SCI LLC expects that each inter partes review proceeding will terminate in a Final Written Decision on the patentability of the challenged claims for which review has or will be instituted within one year from institution.

Litigation with Acbel Polytech, Inc.

On November 27, 2013, Fairchild and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation were named as defendants in a complaint filed by Acbel Polytech, Inc. (“Acbel”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The lawsuit alleged a number of causes of action, including breach of warranty, fraud, negligence and strict liability, and has been docketed as Acbel Polytech, Inc. v. Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. et al, Case # 1:13-CV-13046-DJC. On December 10, 2016, the Court issued an order on the Company’s motion for summary judgment dismissing all of Acbel’s claims except for claims alleging breach of implied warranty. Although Acbel is seeking damages in an amount not less than $30 million, the Company is vigorously defending the lawsuit and believes that it has strong defenses. Trial is scheduled for June 12, 2017.

30

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Intellectual Property Matters

The Company faces risk to exposure from claims of infringement of the IP rights of others. In the ordinary course of business, we receive letters asserting that the Company’s products or components breach another party’s rights. These threats may seek that we make royalty payments, that we stop use of such rights, or other remedies.

Note 11:    Fair Value Measurements

Fair Value of Financial Instruments

Summarized information with respect to certain of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 is as follows (in millions):

Other

The carrying amounts of other current assets and liabilities, such as accounts receivable and accounts payable, approximate fair value based on the short-term nature of these instruments.

Fair Value of Long-Term Debt, Including Current Portion

The carrying amounts and fair values of the Company’s long-term borrowings (excluding capital lease obligations, real estate mortgages and equipment financing) as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 are as follows (in millions):

31

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

The fair value of the Company’s 1.00% Notes, 1.625% Notes and Term Loan “B” Facility were estimated based on market prices in active markets (Level 1). The fair value of other long-term debt was estimated based on discounting the remaining principal and interest payments using current market rates for similar debt (Level 2) as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Cost Method Investments

Investments in equity securities that do not qualify for fair value accounting are accounted for under the cost method. Accordingly, the Company accounts for investments in companies that it does not control, or have significant influence over, under the cost method, as applicable. If a decline in the fair value of a cost method investment is determined to be other than temporary, an impairment charge is recorded, and the fair value becomes the new cost basis of the investment. The Company evaluates all of its cost method investments for impairment; however, it is not required to determine the fair value of its investment unless impairment indicators are present.

As of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company’s cost method investments had a carrying value of $12.6 million and $12.3 million, respectively.

Note 12:    Financial Instruments

Foreign Currencies

As a multinational business, the Company’s transactions are denominated in a variety of currencies. When appropriate, the Company uses forward foreign currency contracts to reduce its overall exposure to the effects of currency fluctuations on its results of operations and cash flows. The Company’s policy prohibits trading in currencies for which there are no underlying exposures, or entering into trades for any currency to intentionally increase the underlying exposure.

The Company primarily hedges existing assets and liabilities associated with transactions currently on its balance sheet, which are undesignated hedges for accounting purposes.

As of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the Company had net outstanding foreign exchange contracts with notional amounts of $127.0 million and $95.9 million, respectively. Such contracts were obtained through financial institutions and were scheduled to mature within one to three months from the time of purchase. Management believes that these financial instruments should not subject the Company to increased risks from foreign exchange movements because gains and losses on these contracts should offset losses and gains on the underlying assets, liabilities and transactions to which they are related.

The following summarizes the Company’s net foreign exchange positions in U.S. dollars as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in millions):

32

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

The Company is exposed to credit-related losses if counterparties to its foreign exchange contracts fail to perform their obligations. As of March 31, 2017, the counterparties to the Company’s foreign currency hedge contracts as well as the cash flow hedges described below are held at financial institutions which the Company believes to be highly rated, and no credit-related losses are anticipated. Amounts receivable or payable under the contracts are included in other current assets or accrued expenses in the accompanying Consolidated Balance Sheet. For the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016, realized and unrealized foreign currency transactions totaled a $2.3 million loss and a $1.0 million loss, respectively. The realized and unrealized foreign currency transactions are included in other income and expenses in the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income.

Cash Flow Hedges

Foreign currency risk

The purpose of the Company’s foreign currency hedging activities is to protect the Company from the risk that the eventual cash flows resulting from transactions in foreign currencies will be adversely affected by changes in exchange rates. The Company enters into forward contracts that are designated as foreign currency cash flow hedges of selected forecasted payments denominated in currencies other than U.S. dollars.

All derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value and classified based on the instrument’s maturity date.

For the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016, the Company recorded a net loss of zero and $0.2 million respectively, associated with cash flow hedges recognized as a component of cost of revenues.

Interest rate risk

All derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their fair value and classified based on the instrument’s maturity date.

The Company uses interest rate swap contracts to mitigate its exposure to interest rate fluctuations associated with the Term Loan “B” Facility. The Company does not use such swap contracts for speculative or trading purposes.

To partially offset the variability of future interest payments on the outstanding Term Loan “B” Facility arising from changes in LIBOR rates, on January 11, 2017, the Company entered into interest rate swap agreements with three financial institutions for notional amounts totaling $500.0 million, $750.0 million and $1.0 billion expiring on December 29, 2017, December 31, 2018 and December 31, 2019, respectively, effectively hedging some of the future variable rate LIBOR interest expense to a fixed rate interest expense. The derivative instruments qualified for accounting as a cash flow hedge in accordance with ASC 815, and the Company designated it as such. The Company has performed an effectiveness assessment and concluded that there is no ineffectiveness during the three months ended March 31, 2017. As of March 31, 2017, the aggregate notional value of the interest rate swap contracts was $500.0 million.

The Company did not have any interest rate swap contracts outstanding during three months ended April 1, 2016.

33

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

The following table presents the effective amounts related to derivative instruments designated as cash flow hedges affecting accumulated other comprehensive loss and the Company’s condensed consolidated statements of operations for the three months ended March 31, 2017 (in millions):

Convertible Note Hedges

The Company entered into convertible note hedges in connection with the issuance of the 1.625% Notes. See Note 7: “Long-Term Debt” for further details.

Note 13:    Income Taxes

The Company has historically determined its interim income tax provision by applying the estimated effective income tax rate expected to be applicable for the full fiscal year to the income before income taxes for the period. In determining the full year estimate, the Company does not include the estimated impact of unusual and/or infrequent items, which may cause significant variations in the customary relationship between income tax expense and income before income taxes. Significant judgment is exercised in determining the income tax provision due to transactions, credits and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain.

ASU 2016-09 requires the tax effects of all equity award excess tax benefits to be recognized discretely in the quarter in which they occur. The Company’s effective tax rate for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 was 31.6%, which differs from the U.S. statutory federal income tax rate of 35% principally due to the discrete impact of ASU 2016-09. See Note 2 “Recent Accounting Pronouncements.”

The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits in tax expense on the consolidated statements of income. The Company had approximately $5.4 million and $4.2 million of net interest and penalties accrued at March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016, respectively.

Although the Company cannot predict the timing of resolution with taxing authorities, if any, it believes it is reasonably possible that $3.8 million of its unrecognized tax benefits will be reduced in the next 12 months due to settlement with tax authorities or expiration of the applicable statute of limitations.

Tax years prior to 2012 are generally not subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Services (the “IRS”) except for items involving tax attributes that have been carried forward to tax years whose statute of limitations remains open. The Company is not currently under IRS examination. For state tax returns, the Company is generally not subject to income tax examinations for years prior to 2011. The Company is also subject to routine examinations by various foreign tax jurisdictions in which it operates. With respect to major jurisdictions outside the United States, the Company’s subsidiaries are no longer subject to income tax audits for years prior to 2006. The Company is currently under audit in the following significant jurisdictions: Malaysia, China and the Philippines.

34

Table of Contents

ON SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS - Continued

(unaudited)

Note 14:    Changes in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

Amounts comprising the Company’s accumulated other comprehensive loss and reclassifications for the quarter ended March 31, 2017 are as follows (net of tax of $0.6, in millions):

(1) Foreign currency translation adjustments are net of tax of $0.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

(2) Effects of cash flow hedges are net of tax of $0.4 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2017.

Amounts which were reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive loss to the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income during the quarters ended March 31, 2017 and April 1, 2016, respectively, were as follows (net of tax of $0, in millions):