UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 20-F
(Mark One)
|
|
|
o |
|
REGISTRATION STATEMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 12(b) OR (g) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 |
OR
|
|
|
þ |
|
[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the fiscal year ended 31 March 2011
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
OR
|
|
|
o |
|
SHELL COMPANY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934 |
Date of event requiring this shell company report
For the transition period from to
Commission file number 1-15240
JAMES HARDIE INDUSTRIES SE
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
N/A
(Translation of Registrants name into English)
Ireland
(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)
Europa House, Second Floor
Harcourt Center
Harcourt Street, Dublin 2, Ireland
(Address of principal executive offices)
Marcin Firek
(Contact name)
353 1411 6924 (Telephone) 353 1479 1128 (Facsimile)
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
|
|
|
Title of each class: |
|
Name of each exchange on which registered: |
Common stock, represented by CHESS Units of Foreign
Securities
|
|
New York Stock Exchange* |
CHESS Units of Foreign Securities
|
|
New York Stock Exchange* |
American Depositary Shares, each representing five units
of CHESS Units of Foreign Securities
|
|
New York Stock Exchange |
|
|
|
* |
|
Listed, not for trading, but only in connection with the registered American Depositary
Shares, pursuant to the requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission |
Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act.
None.
Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act.
None.
Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuers classes of capital or common
stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report 436,386,587 shares of common stock
at 31 March 2011.
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of
the Securities Act. þ Yes o No
If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not
required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. o Yes þ No
Note Checking the box will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to
Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 from their obligations under those
Sections.
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. þ Yes o 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). þ Yes o No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer,
or a non-accelerated filer. See the definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer
in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer þ
|
|
Accelerated filer o
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o |
Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial
statements included in this filing:
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. GAAP þ
|
|
International Financial Reporting Standards as issued
by the International Accounting Standards Board o
|
|
Other o |
If Other has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which
financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow:
o Item 17 o Item 18
If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as
defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). o Yes þ No
FORM 20-F CROSS REFERENCE INDEX
|
|
|
|
|
20-F Item Number and Description |
|
|
Page |
|
PART 1 |
|
|
|
|
Item 1. Identity of Directors, Senior Management and Advisers |
|
Not applicable |
|
Item 2. Offer Statistics and Expected Timetable |
|
Not applicable |
|
Item 3. Key Information |
|
|
|
|
A. Selected Financial Data |
|
|
6-8 |
|
B. Capitalisation and Indebtness |
|
Not applicable |
|
C. Reasons for the Offer and Use of Proceeds |
|
Not applicable |
|
D. Risk Factors |
|
106-121 |
|
Item 4. Information on the Company |
|
|
|
|
A. History and Development of the Company |
|
|
9-11 |
|
B. Business Overview |
|
|
12-18 |
|
C. Organisational Structure |
|
|
10-11; 19 |
|
D. Property, Plants and Equipment |
|
|
19-21; 38-40 |
|
Item 4A. Unresolved Staff Comments |
|
None |
|
Item 5. Operating and Financial Review and Prospects |
|
|
|
|
A. Operating Results |
|
|
26-37 |
|
B. Liquidity and Capital Resources |
|
|
37-39 |
|
C. Research and Development, Patents and Licenses, etc |
|
|
17-18; 40 |
|
D. Trend Information |
|
|
40 |
|
E. Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements |
|
|
40 |
|
F. Tabular Disclosure of Contractual Obligations |
|
|
40 |
|
G. Safe Harbor |
|
|
5-6 |
|
Item 6. Directors, Senior Management and Employees |
|
|
|
|
A. Directors and Senior Management |
|
|
22-25 |
|
B. Compensation |
|
|
53-56 |
|
C. Board Practices |
|
22-25; 61; 66-67 |
|
D. Employees |
|
133 |
|
E. Share Ownership |
|
133-142 |
|
Item 7. Major Shareholders and Related Party Transactions |
|
|
|
|
A. Major Shareholders |
|
142-143 |
|
B. Related Party Transactions |
|
|
143-144 |
|
C. Interests of Experts and Counsel |
|
None |
|
Item 8. Financial Information |
|
|
|
|
A. Consolidated Statements and Other Financial Information |
|
74-104 |
|
B. Significant Changes |
|
None |
|
Item 9. The Offer and Listing |
|
|
|
|
A. Offer and Listing Details |
|
144-145 |
|
B. Plan of Distribution |
|
Not Applicable |
|
C. Markets |
|
145-146 |
|
D. Selling Shareholders |
|
Not Applicable |
|
E. Dilution |
|
Not Applicable |
|
E. Expenses of the Issue |
|
Not Applicable |
|
Item 10. Additional Information |
|
|
|
|
A. Share Capital |
|
Not Applicable |
|
B. Memorandum and Articles of Association |
|
146-153 |
|
C. Material Contracts |
|
153-154 |
|
D. Exchange Controls |
|
154-155 |
|
E. Taxation |
|
155-164 |
|
F. Dividends and paying agents |
|
Not Applicable |
|
G. Statement by Experts |
|
Not Applicable |
|
2
FORM 20-F CROSS REFERENCE INDEX (Continued)
|
|
|
|
|
20-F Item Number and Description |
|
|
Page |
|
H. Documents on Display |
|
|
164 |
|
I. Subsidiary Information |
|
Not Applicable |
|
Item 11. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
|
164-166 |
|
Item 12. Description of Securities Other Than Equity Securities |
|
|
|
|
A. Debt Securities |
|
Not Applicable |
|
B. Warrants and Rights |
|
Not Applicable |
|
C. Other Securities |
|
Not Applicable |
|
D. American Depositary Shares |
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART II |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 13. Defaults, Dividend Arrearages and Delinquencies |
|
None |
|
Item 14. Material Modifications to the Rights of Security Holders and Use of Proceeds |
|
146-153 |
|
Item 15. Controls and Procedures |
|
|
70-71 |
|
Item 16A. Audit Committee Financial Expert |
|
|
66-67 |
|
Item 16B. Code of Business Conduct and Ethics |
|
|
67 |
|
Item 16C. Principal Accountant Fees and Services |
|
|
105 |
|
Item 16D. Exemptions from the Listing Standards for Audit Committees |
|
Not Applicable |
|
Item 16E. Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers |
|
None |
|
Item 16F. Change in Registrants Certifying Accountant |
|
None |
|
Item 16G. Corporate Governance |
|
|
72-73 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
PART III |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 17. Financial Statements |
|
Not Applicable |
|
Item 18. Financial Statements |
|
74-104 |
|
Item 19. Exhibits |
|
167-172 |
|
3
SECTION 1.
INTRODUCTION
In this annual report, unless the context otherwise indicates, James Hardie Industries SE, a
Societas Europaea, or a European company incorporated and existing under the laws of Ireland, is
referred to as JHI SE. JHI SE together with its direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries as of
the time relevant to the applicable reference, are collectively referred to as the James Hardie
Group. JHI SE and its current direct and indirect wholly owned subsidiaries are collectively
referred to as we, us, our, JHI SE and its wholly owned subsidiaries, James Hardie or the
Company.
The term fiscal year refers to our fiscal year ended 31 March of such year; the term dollars,
US$ or $ refers to US dollars; the term A$ refers to Australian dollars; and the term NZ$
refers to New Zealand dollars. Unless otherwise stated, all amounts in A$ have been converted into
US$ at the 31 March 2011 exchange rate of A$0.9676 to US$1.0000.
On 2 June 2010, our shareholders approved Stage 2 of a two-stage proposal to transform James Hardie
Industries SE to an Irish SE by changing our registered corporate domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland.
Following this vote, on 17 June 2010, we changed our registered corporate domicile to Ireland and are now
subject to Irish law in addition to the Council of the European Unions Regulation on the Statute
for a European Company (SE Regulations). In addition, we continue to operate under the regulatory
requirements of numerous jurisdictions and organisations, including the ASX, ASIC, the NYSE, the
United States Securities and Exchange Commission, the Irish Takeovers Panel and various other
rulemaking bodies. We became an Irish tax resident on 29 June 2010.
As a company incorporated under the laws of Ireland, we have listed our securities for trading on
the Australian Securities Exchange, or ASX, through the use of the Clearing House Electronic
Subregister System, or CHESS, via CHESS Units of Foreign Securities, or CUFS. CUFS are a form of
depositary security that represent a beneficial ownership interest in the securities of a
non-Australian corporation. Each of our CUFS represents the beneficial ownership of one share of
common stock of JHI SE, the legal ownership of which is held by CHESS Depositary Nominees Pty Ltd.
The CUFS are listed and traded on the ASX under the symbol JHX.
We have also listed our securities for trading on the New York Stock Exchange, or NYSE. We sponsor
a program, whereby beneficial ownership of five CUFS is represented by one American Depositary
Share, or ADS, which is issued by The Bank of New York Mellon. These ADSs trade on the NYSE in the
form of American Depositary Receipts, or ADRs, under the symbol JHX. Unless the context indicates
otherwise, when we refer to ADSs, we are referring to ADRs or ADSs and when we refer to our common
stock we are referring to the shares of our common stock that are represented by CUFS.
Glossary of abbreviations and terms
Non-financial Terms
|
|
|
ABS
|
|
Australian Bureau of Statistics |
ADR
|
|
American Depositary Receipt |
ADS
|
|
American Depositary Share |
AFFA
|
|
Amended and Restated Final Funding Agreement, as amended from time to time |
AGM
|
|
Annual General Meeting |
AICF
|
|
Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund |
ASIC
|
|
Australian Securities and Investments Commission |
ASX
|
|
Australian Securities Exchange |
ATO
|
|
Australian Taxation Office |
CEO
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
CFO
|
|
Chief Financial Officer |
CHESS
|
|
Clearing House Electronic Subregister System |
CUFS
|
|
CHESS Units of Foreign Securities |
FDRs
|
|
Freely Distributable Reserves |
GIC
|
|
General Interest Charge |
GMT
|
|
Group Management Team |
IRS
|
|
United States Internal Revenue Service |
KPMG Actuarial
|
|
KPMG Actuarial Pty Limited |
LIBOR
|
|
London Interbank Offered Rate |
NAHB
|
|
National Association of Home Builders |
NBSK
|
|
Northern Bleached Softwood Kraft, the Companys benchmark grade of pulp |
NSW
|
|
New South Wales |
NYSE
|
|
New York Stock Exchange |
RSU
|
|
Restricted Stock Unit |
SCI
|
|
Special Commission Inquiry |
SEC
|
|
United States Securities and Exchange Commission |
Former James Hardie Companies Consists of Amaca Pty Ltd, Amaba Pty Ltd and ABN 60 Pty Ltd.
Sales Volume
mmsf million square feet, where a square foot is defined as a standard square foot of 5/16
thickness.
msf thousand square feet, where a square foot is defined as a standard square foot of 5/16
thickness.
4
Forward-Looking Statements
This annual report contains forward-looking statements. We may from time to time make
forward-looking statements in our periodic reports filed with or furnished to the SEC, on Forms
20-F and 6-K, in our annual reports to shareholders, in offering circulars, invitation memoranda
and prospectuses, in media releases and other written materials and in oral statements made by our
officers, directors or employees to analysts, institutional investors, existing and potential
lenders, representatives of the media and others. Statements
that are not historical facts are forward-looking statements and such forwardlooking statements
are statements made pursuant to the Safe Harbor Provisions of the Private Securities Litigation
Reform Act of 1995.
Examples of forward-looking statements include:
|
|
|
statements about our future performance; |
|
|
|
|
projections of our results of operations or financial condition; |
|
|
|
|
statements regarding our plans, objectives or goals, including those relating to
strategies, initiatives, competition, acquisitions, dispositions and/or our products; |
|
|
|
|
expectations concerning the costs associated with the suspension or closure of
operations at any of our plants and future plans with respect to any such plants; |
|
|
|
|
expectations that our credit facilities will be extended or renewed; |
|
|
|
|
expectations concerning dividend payments and share buy-back; |
|
|
|
|
statements concerning our corporate and tax domiciles and potential changes to them,
including potential tax charges; |
|
|
|
|
statements regarding tax liabilities and related audits, reviews and proceedings; |
|
|
|
|
statements as to the possible consequences of proceedings brought against us and
certain of our former directors and officers by the Australian Securities and
Investments Commission (which we refer to as ASIC); |
|
|
|
|
expectations about the timing and amount of contributions to the Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund (which we refer to as AICF), a special purpose fund for the
compensation of proven Australian asbestos-related personal injury and death claims; |
|
|
|
|
expectations concerning indemnification obligations; |
|
|
|
|
statements about product or environmental liabilities; and |
|
|
|
|
statements about economic conditions, such as economic or housing recovery, the
levels of new home construction, unemployment levels, changes or stability in housing
values, the availability of mortgages and other financing, mortgage and other interest
rates, housing affordability and supply, the levels of foreclosures and home resales,
currency exchange rates and consumer confidence. |
Words such as believe, anticipate, plan, expect, intend, target, estimate, project,
predict, forecast, guideline, aim, will, should, likely, continue and similar
expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements but are not the exclusive means of
identifying such statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these
forward-looking statements and all such forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety
by reference to the following cautionary statements.
5
Forward-looking statements are based on our current expectations, estimates and assumptions and
because forward-looking statements address future results, events and conditions, they, by their
very nature, involve inherent risks and uncertainties, many of which are unforeseeable and beyond
our control. Such known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors may cause our actual
results, performance or other achievements to differ materially from the anticipated results,
performance or achievements expressed, projected or implied by these forward-looking statements.
These factors, some of which are discussed under Risk Factors in Section 3, include, but are not
limited to: all matters relating to or arising out of the prior manufacture of products that
contained asbestos by current and former James Hardie subsidiaries; required contributions to the
AICF, any shortfall in the AICF and the effect of currency exchange rate movements on the amount
recorded in our financial statements as an asbestos liability; governmental loan facility to the
AICF; compliance with and changes in tax laws and treatments;
competition and product pricing in the markets in which we operate; the consequences of product
failures or defects; exposure to environmental, asbestos or other legal proceedings; general
economic and market conditions; the supply and cost of raw materials; possible increases in
competition and the potential that competitors could copy our products; reliance on a small number
of customers; a customers inability to
pay; compliance with and changes in environmental and
health and safety laws; risks of conducting business internationally; compliance with and changes
in laws and regulations; the effect of the transfer of our corporate domicile from The Netherlands
to Ireland to become an Irish SE including employee relations, changes in corporate governance and
potential tax benefits; currency exchange risks; dependence on customer preference and the
concentration of our customer base on large format retail customers, distributors and dealers;
dependence on residential and commercial construction markets; the effect of adverse changes in
climate or weather patterns; possible inability to renew credit facilities on terms favourable to
us, or at all; acquisition or sale of businesses and business segments; changes in our key
management personnel; inherent limitations on internal controls; use of accounting estimates; and
all other risks identified in our reports filed with Australian, Irish and US securities agencies
and exchanges (as appropriate). We caution you that the foregoing list of factors is not exhaustive
and that other risks and uncertainties may cause actual results to differ materially from those in
forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made and
are statements of our current expectations concerning future results, events and conditions.
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
We have included in this annual report the audited consolidated financial statements of the
Company, consisting of our consolidated balance sheets as of 31 March 2011 and 31 March 2010, and
our consolidated statements of operations, changes in shareholders deficit and cash flows for the
years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009, together with the related notes thereto. The consolidated
financial statements included in this annual report have been prepared in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or US GAAP.
The selected consolidated financial information summarised below for the five most recent fiscal
years has been derived in part from the Companys financial statements. You should read the
selected consolidated financial information in conjunction with the Companys financial statements
and related notes contained in Section 2, Consolidated Financial Statements and with the
information provided in Section 2, Managements Discussion and Analysis. Historic financial data
is not necessarily indicative of our future results and you should not unduly rely on it.
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year ended 31 March |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(In millions of US dollars except sales price per unit and per share data) |
|
Consolidated Statements of Operations Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement (1) |
|
$ |
814.0 |
|
|
$ |
828.1 |
|
|
$ |
929.3 |
|
|
$ |
1,170.5 |
|
|
$ |
1,291.2 |
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement (2) |
|
|
353.0 |
|
|
|
296.5 |
|
|
|
273.3 |
|
|
|
298.3 |
|
|
|
251.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net sales |
|
$ |
1,167.0 |
|
|
$ |
1,124.6 |
|
|
$ |
1,202.6 |
|
|
$ |
1,468.8 |
|
|
$ |
1,542.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss) (3) |
|
$ |
104.7 |
|
|
$ |
(21.0 |
) |
|
$ |
173.6 |
|
|
$ |
(36.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(86.6 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
(9.0 |
) |
|
|
(7.7 |
) |
|
|
(11.2 |
) |
|
|
(11.1 |
) |
|
|
(12.0 |
) |
Interest income |
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
8.2 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
5.5 |
|
Other (expense) income (4) |
|
|
(3.7 |
) |
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
(14.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations before income
taxes |
|
|
96.6 |
|
|
|
(18.7 |
) |
|
|
155.8 |
|
|
|
(35.5 |
) |
|
|
(93.1 |
) |
Income tax (expense) benefit |
|
|
(443.6 |
) |
|
|
(66.2 |
) |
|
|
(19.5 |
) |
|
|
(36.1 |
) |
|
|
243.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from operations |
|
$ |
(347.0 |
) |
|
$ |
(84.9 |
) |
|
$ |
136.3 |
|
|
$ |
(71.6 |
) |
|
$ |
150.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
$ |
(347.0 |
) |
|
$ |
(84.9 |
) |
|
$ |
136.3 |
|
|
$ |
(71.6 |
) |
|
$ |
151.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from operations per common
share basic |
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
Net (loss) income per common share basic |
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income from operations per common
share diluted |
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.31 |
|
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
0.32 |
|
Net (loss) income per common share
diluted |
|
$ |
(0.80 |
) |
|
$ |
(0.20 |
) |
|
$ |
0.31 |
|
|
$ |
(0.16 |
) |
|
$ |
0.33 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid per share |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.08 |
|
|
$ |
0.27 |
|
|
$ |
0.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average number of common shares
outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
|
435.6 |
|
|
|
433.1 |
|
|
|
432.3 |
|
|
|
455.0 |
|
|
|
464.6 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
435.6 |
|
|
|
433.1 |
|
|
|
434.5 |
|
|
|
455.0 |
|
|
|
464.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Cash Flow Information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in) operating
activities |
|
$ |
147.2 |
|
|
$ |
183.1 |
|
|
$ |
(45.2 |
) |
|
$ |
319.3 |
|
|
$ |
(67.1 |
) |
Cash flows used in investing activities |
|
$ |
(49.6 |
) |
|
$ |
(50.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(26.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(38.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(92.6 |
) |
Cash flows (used in) provided by financing
activities |
|
$ |
(89.7 |
) |
|
$ |
(159.0 |
) |
|
$ |
25.0 |
|
|
$ |
(254.4 |
) |
|
$ |
(136.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortisation |
|
$ |
62.9 |
|
|
$ |
61.7 |
|
|
$ |
56.4 |
|
|
$ |
56.5 |
|
|
$ |
50.7 |
|
Adjusted EBITDA (5) |
|
$ |
167.6 |
|
|
$ |
40.7 |
|
|
$ |
230.0 |
|
|
$ |
19.9 |
|
|
$ |
(35.9 |
) |
Capital expenditures |
|
$ |
50.3 |
|
|
$ |
50.5 |
|
|
$ |
26.1 |
|
|
$ |
38.5 |
|
|
$ |
92.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volume (million square feet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement (1) |
|
|
1,248.0 |
|
|
|
1,303.7 |
|
|
|
1,526.6 |
|
|
|
1,951.2 |
|
|
|
2,216.2 |
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement (2) |
|
|
407.8 |
|
|
|
389.6 |
|
|
|
390.6 |
|
|
|
398.2 |
|
|
|
390.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average sales price per unit (per thousand
square feet) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement (1) |
|
US $652 |
|
US $635 |
|
US $609 |
|
US $600 |
|
US $583 |
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement (2) |
|
|
A $916 |
|
|
|
A $894 |
|
|
|
A $879 |
|
|
|
A $862 |
|
|
|
A $842 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net current assets (6) |
|
$ |
135.6 |
|
|
$ |
50.4 |
|
|
$ |
137.7 |
|
|
$ |
183.7 |
|
|
$ |
259.0 |
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,960.6 |
|
|
$ |
2,178.8 |
|
|
$ |
1,891.7 |
|
|
$ |
2,179.9 |
|
|
$ |
2,128.1 |
|
Total debt |
|
$ |
59.0 |
|
|
$ |
154.0 |
|
|
$ |
324.0 |
|
|
$ |
264.5 |
|
|
$ |
188.0 |
|
Common stock |
|
$ |
222.5 |
|
|
$ |
221.1 |
|
|
$ |
219.2 |
|
|
$ |
219.7 |
|
|
$ |
251.8 |
|
Shareholders (deficit) equity |
|
$ |
(454.5 |
) |
|
$ |
(117.9 |
) |
|
$ |
(108.7 |
) |
|
$ |
(202.6 |
) |
|
$ |
258.7 |
|
7
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On 1 April 2008, the Company realigned its operating segments by combining the previously
reported segments of USA Fibre Cement and Other into one operating segment, USA and Europe
Fibre Cement. USA and Europe Fibre Cement manufactures fibre cement interior linings, exterior
siding and related accessory products in the United States which are sold in the United
States, Canada and Europe. |
|
|
|
The segment also includes fibre reinforced concrete pipes manufactured and sold in the
United States (through May 2008). Our Plant City, Florida Hardie Pipe Plant was closed and
the business ceased operations in May 2008. |
|
(2) |
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement includes all fibre cement manufactured in Australia, New Zealand
and the Philippines and sold in Australia, New Zealand, Asia, the Middle East (Israel, Kuwait,
Qatar and United Arab Emirates) and various Pacific Islands. |
|
(3) |
|
Operating income (loss) includes the following asbestos adjustments, AICF SG&A expenses, ASIC
related recoveries (expenses), SCI and other related expenses, and impairment charges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March |
|
|
2011 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2008 |
|
2007 |
|
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
(Unfavourable) favourable asbestos adjustments |
|
$ |
(85.8 |
) |
|
$ |
(224.2 |
) |
|
$ |
17.4 |
|
|
$ |
(240.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(405.5 |
) |
AICF SG&A expenses |
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
(2.1 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
|
(4.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
ASIC related recoveries (expenses) |
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
(3.4 |
) |
|
|
(14.0 |
) |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
SCI and other related expenses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(13.6 |
) |
Impairment charges |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(71.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For additional information on the asbestos adjustments, AICF SG&A expenses and ASIC
related recoveries (expenses), see Section 2, Managements Discussion and Analysis and
Notes 11 and 13 to our consolidated financial statements in Section 2. |
|
(4) |
|
Other expense in fiscal year 2011 primarily includes an unrealised loss resulting from a
change in the fair value of interest rate swap contracts. Other income in fiscal year 2010
primarily includes a realised gain arising from the sale of restricted short-term investments
held by the AICF. Other expense in fiscal year 2009 consists of an other-than-temporary
impairment charge related to restricted short-term investments held by the AICF of US$14.8
million. For additional information see Section 2, Managements Discussion and Analysis
Results of Operations. |
|
(5) |
|
Adjusted EBITDA represents income from operations before interest income, interest expense,
income taxes, other non-operating expense (income), described in footnote four above,
cumulative effect of change in accounting principle, and depreciation and amortisation
charges. The following table presents a reconciliation of Adjusted EBITDA to net cash provided
by (used in) operating activities, as this is the most directly comparable GAAP financial
measure to Adjusted EBITDA for each of the periods indicated.
Items comprising Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities,
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash provided
by (used in) operating activities and Change in
operating assets and liabilities, net for fiscal years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009 are set forth on the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows on page 78. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities |
|
$ |
147.2 |
|
|
$ |
183.1 |
|
|
$ |
(45.2 |
) |
|
$ |
319.3 |
|
|
$ |
(67.1 |
) |
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss)
income to net cash provided by (used in)
operating activities |
|
|
(136.8 |
) |
|
|
(312.0 |
) |
|
|
(3.5 |
) |
|
|
(318.9 |
) |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
Change in operating assets and liabilities, net |
|
|
(357.4 |
) |
|
|
44.0 |
|
|
|
185.0 |
|
|
|
(72.0 |
) |
|
|
214.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income |
|
|
(347.0 |
) |
|
|
(84.9 |
) |
|
|
136.3 |
|
|
|
(71.6 |
) |
|
|
151.7 |
|
Cumulative effect of change in accounting
principle |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
Income tax expense (benefit) |
|
|
443.6 |
|
|
|
66.2 |
|
|
|
19.5 |
|
|
|
36.1 |
|
|
|
(243.9 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
9.0 |
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
12.0 |
|
Interest income |
|
|
(4.6 |
) |
|
|
(3.7 |
) |
|
|
(8.2 |
) |
|
|
(12.2 |
) |
|
|
(5.5 |
) |
Other expense (income) |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
(6.3 |
) |
|
|
14.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortisation |
|
|
62.9 |
|
|
|
61.7 |
|
|
|
56.4 |
|
|
|
56.5 |
|
|
|
50.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA |
|
$ |
167.6 |
|
|
$ |
40.7 |
|
|
$ |
230.0 |
|
|
$ |
19.9 |
|
|
$ |
(35.9 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted EBITDA is not a measure of financial performance under US GAAP and should not
be considered an alternative to, or more meaningful than, income from operations, net income
or net cash provided by (used in) operating activities as defined by US GAAP or as a measure of our profitability or liquidity. Not
all companies calculate Adjusted EBITDA in the same manner as we have and, accordingly,
Adjusted EBITDA may not be comparable with other companies. We have included information
concerning Adjusted EBITDA because we believe that this data is commonly used by investors
to evaluate the ability of a companys earnings from its core business operations to satisfy
its debt, capital expenditure and working capital requirements. To permit evaluation of this
data on a consistent basis from period to period, Adjusted EBITDA has been adjusted for
non-cash charges, as well as non-operating income and expense items. |
|
(6) |
|
Total current assets less total current liabilities. |
8
INFORMATION ON THE COMPANY
History and Development of the Company
The Company was established in 1888 as an import business. In 1951, the Company became publicly
owned as a listed company on the Australian Stock Exchange. In the following years, the Company
built up a diverse portfolio of building and industrial products businesses including a wide range
of asbestos-based products. In the mid-1980s, we pioneered the development of asbestos-free fibre
cement technology and began designing and manufacturing a wide range of fibre cement building
products that made use of the benefits that came from the products durability, versatility and
strength. Using the technical and manufacturing expertise developed in Australia, we expanded our
operations, in particular to the United States, to become a specialised manufacturer of a wide
range of fibre cement building materials.
Our legal name was changed to James Hardie Industries N.V. from RCI Netherlands Holdings B.V. in
July 2001 when our legal form was converted from a besloten vennootschap met beperkte
aansprakelijkheid (which we refer to as a B.V.), to a naamloze vennootschap (which we refer to
as N.V.), or a public limited liability company whose stock, unlike a private limited liability
company, may be transferred without executing a notarial deed if such company is listed on a
recognised stock exchange. In February 2001, the shareholders of James Hardie Industries Limited
(which we refer to as JHIL) agreed to exchange their shares for shares in James Hardie Industries
N.V., which retained its primary listing on the ASX. In February 2010, our legal name was changed
to James Hardie Industries SE when our legal form was converted from a Dutch N.V. to a Dutch
Societas Europaea (which we refer to as SE) in connection with implementing Stage 1 of a
two-stage re-domicile proposal (together, the Re-domicile) to change our registered corporate
domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland. As a Dutch SE, we became subject to the Council of the
European Unions Regulation on the Statute for a European Company (SE Regulations). On 17 June
2010, we implemented Stage 2 of the Re-domicile and changed our registered corporate domicile to
Ireland and became an Irish tax resident on 29 June 2010.
We conduct our operations under legislation in various jurisdictions. As an Irish SE, we are
subject to Irish law in addition to the SE Regulation, European Union Council Regulations and
relevant European Union Directives. Prior to completing Stage 2 of the Re-domicile, we were also
subject to the jurisdiction of the Dutch authority Financial Markets and the Dutch Corporate
Governance Code. In addition, we operate under the regulatory requirements of numerous
jurisdictions and organisations, including the ASX, ASIC, the NYSE, the US SEC, the Irish Takeover
Panel and various other rulemaking bodies.
Our corporate domicile is located in Ireland. The address of our registered office in Ireland is
Europa House, Second Floor, Harcourt Centre, Harcourt Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. The telephone
number there is +353 1411 6924. Our agent in the United States is CT Corporation. Its office is
located at 3 Winners Circle, 3rd Floor, Albany, New York 12205.
Corporate Restructuring
On 2 July 1998, James Hardie Industries Ltd (which we refer to as JHIL and now known as ABN 60
Pty Ltd, which we refer to as ABN 60), was then a public company organised under the laws of
Australia and listed on the ASX. At that time, JHIL announced a plan of reorganisation and capital
restructuring (which we refer to as the 1998 Reorganisation) to address the structural imbalance
and resulting operational, financial and commercial issues resulting from increasing significance
and growth opportunities of our US operations and the location of corporate management and our
shareholder base in Australia.
In February 2001, ABN 60, or JHIL, established the Medical Research and Compensation Foundation
(which we refer to as the Foundation) by gifting A$3.0 million (US$1.7 million based on the 31
March 2001 exchange rate of A$1.7989 to US$1.0000) in cash and transferring ownership of Amaca Pty
Ltd (which we refer to as Amaca) and Amaba Pty Ltd (which we refer to as Amaba) to the
Foundation.
9
On 19 October 2001, we completed a plan of reorganisation and capital restructuring (which we refer
to as the 2001 Reorganisation). This restructuring was done to provide us with a more efficient
financial structure in light of potential global expansion, to allow us to use our stock for
acquisitions if necessary and to increase overall returns to our shareholders. The 2001
Reorganisation consisted of the issuance of shares of JHI NV common stock represented by CUFS to
substantially all ABN 60 shareholders in exchange for their shares of ABN 60 common stock pursuant
to an approved Australian scheme of arrangement and the listing of the shares of JHI NV represented
by CUFS on the ASX and the listing of ADSs, representing CUFS, which in turn represent shares of
JHI NV, on the NYSE. As a result of the share exchange, ABN 60 shareholders ceased to hold any
direct interest in ABN 60 and instead became the holders of interests in JHI NV common shares,
receiving substantially their same proportional ownership interests in JHI NV as they had in ABN 60
before exchanging their shares.
In addition, as a result of the exchange, ABN 60 became a direct subsidiary of JHI NV. Following
the 2001 Reorganisation, JHI NV controlled the same assets and liabilities as ABN 60 controlled
immediately prior to the 2001 Reorganisation.
During fiscal year 2003, ABN 60 transferred control of all of its non-operating subsidiaries to RCI
Holdings Pty Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of JHI NV, to distinguish between the operating group
of companies and non-operating subsidiaries.
Following the consolidation of the operating assets of the James Hardie Group under JHI NV in
fiscal year 2003, the principal activity of ABN 60 was paying amounts in accordance with the Deed
of Covenant and Indemnity. At that time, the cash position of the Company had improved
significantly as a result of the sale of the Companys gypsum business in the United States and the
impending sale of a gypsum mine in Nevada. On 31 March 2003, following a thorough review to
determine that the funds available to ABN 60 would be sufficient to meet the claims of all
creditors, the shares in ABN 60 were transferred to the ABN 60 Foundation. ABN 60 Foundation was
established to be the sole shareholder of ABN 60. ABN 60 was managed by independent directors and
operated entirely independently of the Company.
In August 2008, following proceedings commenced by the Commissioner of Taxation, the Federal Court
of Australia made orders providing for the reinstatement of James Hardie Australia Finance Pty Ltd
(which we refer to as JHAF), and the appointment of a liquidator. JHAF is currently a subsidiary of
James Hardie International Holdings SE (which we refer to as JHIHSE) within the James Hardie group.
JHAF was deregistered in August 2005 following a members voluntary winding up. In December 2008,
following our settlement with the ATO, the Federal Court of Australia made orders terminating the
liquidation of JHAF. Accordingly, the liquidator was removed and JHAF is now under our full control
as a wholly owned subsidiary of JHIHSE.
In August 2009, JHI NV shareholders approved Stage 1 of the Re-domicile to move our corporate
domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland. Following this vote, in February 2010, the Company
transformed from a Dutch N.V. to a Dutch SE registered in The Netherlands and, accordingly, the
legal name of the Company was changed to James Hardie Industries SE. On 2 June 2010, our
shareholders approved Stage 2 of the Re-domicile. Following this vote, on 17 June 2010, we changed
our registered corporate domicile to Ireland.
On 17 May 2011, we announced that we had commenced an internal reorganisation involving the
simplification of our corporate structure, including some of the arrangements which were
previously part of our Netherlands domicile. This internal reorganisation is being made to
facilitate the ability to access and distribute surplus cash flows and earnings of our operating
subsidiaries more efficiently, including for the purpose of making periodic contributions to
AICF. As part of this restructure, the Company incurred a tax charge of US$32.6 million on
undistributed earnings of its US subsidiaries, which is included in the fiscal year 2011 results
of operations, as it intends to remit US earnings as part of the internal reorganisation.
10
This charge will not impact the contribution to AICF in July 2011, although it is expected to
reduce the contribution to AICF in July 2012 by up to approximately US$11.4 million.
The following is a simplified diagram of our current corporate structure:
Current
Consolidation of the AICF
In February 2007, our shareholders approved the AFFA entered into on 21 November 2006 to provide
long-term funding to the AICF. JHI SE owns 100% of James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd (the Performing
Subsidiary) that funds the AICF subject to the provisions of the AFFA. We appoint three of the
AICF directors and the NSW Government appoints two of the AICF directors.
Under the terms of the AFFA, the Performing Subsidiary has an obligation to make payments to the
AICF on an annual basis, depending on our net operating cash flow. The amounts of these annual
payments are dependent on several factors, including our free cash flow (as defined in the AFFA),
actuarial estimations, actual claims paid, operating expenses of the AICF and the annual cash flow
cap. JHI SE guarantees the Performing Subsidiarys obligation. As a result, for purposes of US
GAAP, we consider us to be the primary beneficiary of the AICF.
Our interest in the AICF is considered variable because the potential impact on us will vary based
upon the annual actuarial assessments obtained by the AICF with respect to asbestos-related
personal injury claims against certain former companies of the James Hardie Group, including ABN
60, Amaca and Amaba (which we refer to collectively as the Former James Hardie Companies).
Although we have no legal ownership in the AICF, we consolidate the AICF due to our pecuniary and
contractual interests in the AICF as a result of the funding arrangements outlined in the AFFA. Our
consolidation of the AICF resulted in a separate recognition of the asbestos liability and certain
other items including the related Australian income tax benefit. Among other items, we recorded a
deferred tax asset for the anticipated tax benefit related to asbestos liabilities and a
corresponding increase in the asbestos liability. We believe the Performing Subsidiary is able to claim a tax
deduction for contributions to the asbestos fund. Since fiscal year 2007, we have classified the
expense related to the increase of the asbestos liability as asbestos adjustments and we have
classified the benefit related to the recording of the related deferred tax asset as an income tax
benefit (expense) on our consolidated statements of operations. See Note 2 to our consolidated
financial statements in Section 2.
11
Business Overview
General Overview of our Business
Based on net sales, we believe we are the largest manufacturer of fibre cement products and systems
for internal and external building construction applications in the United States, Australia, New
Zealand, and the Philippines. We market our fibre cement products and systems under various Hardie
brand names and other brand names such as Artisan® Lap and ArtisanTM
Accent Trim by James Hardie, and Cemplank®
siding (we also formerly marketed siding under the brand name SentryTM siding).
We believe that, in certain applications, our fibre cement products and systems provide a
combination of distinctive performance, design and cost advantages when compared to other fibre
cement products and alternative products and systems that use solid wood, engineered wood, vinyl,
brick, stucco or gypsum wallboard. The sale of fibre cement products in the United States accounted
for 68%, 72% and 77% of our total net sales in fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Our fibre cement products are used in a number of markets, including new residential construction
(single and multi-family housing), manufactured housing (mobile and pre-fabricated homes), repair
and remodeling and a variety of commercial and industrial applications (stores, warehouses,
offices, hotels, motels, schools, libraries, museums, dormitories, hospitals, detention facilities,
religious buildings and gymnasiums). We manufacture numerous types of fibre cement products with a
variety of patterned profiles and surface finishes for a range of applications, including external
siding and soffit lining, internal linings, facades, fencing and floor and tile underlayments.
In contrast to some other building materials, fibre cement provides durability attributes, such as
strong resistance to moisture, fire, impact and termites, requires relatively little maintenance
and can be used as a substrate to create a wide variety of architectural effects with textured and
colored finishes.
The breakdown of our net sales by operating segment for each of our last three fiscal years is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended 31 March |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement |
|
$ |
814.0 |
|
|
$ |
828.1 |
|
|
$ |
929.3 |
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement |
|
|
353.0 |
|
|
|
296.5 |
|
|
|
273.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,167.0 |
|
|
$ |
1,124.6 |
|
|
$ |
1,202.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Industry Overview
US Housing Industry and Fibre Cement Industry
In the United States, fibre cement is principally used in the residential building industry. Such
usage fluctuates based on the level of new home construction and the repair and remodeling of
existing homes. The level of activity is generally a function of interest rates and the
availability of finance to homeowners to purchase a new home or make improvements to their existing
homes, inflation, unemployment levels, demographic trends, gross domestic product growth and
consumer confidence. Demand for building products is also affected by residential housing starts
and existing home sales, the age and size of the housing stock and overall home improvement
expenditures. According to the US Census Bureau, annual domestic housing starts decreased from
approximately 905 thousand in calendar year 2008 to approximately 587 thousand in calendar year
2010.
In the United States, the largest application for fibre cement products is in the external siding
industry. Siding is a component of every building and it usually occupies more square footage than
any other building component, such as windows and doors. Selection of siding material is based on
installed cost, durability, aesthetic appeal, strength, weather resistance, maintenance
requirements and cost, insulating properties and other features. Different regions of the United
States show a decided preference among
siding materials according to economic conditions, weather, materials availability and local taste.
The
12
principal siding materials are vinyl, stucco, fibre cement, solid wood, and brick. Vinyl has
the largest share of the siding market.
International Fibre Cement Industry
In Australia and New Zealand, fibre cement building products are used in both the residential and
commercial building industries with applications in external siding, internal walls, ceilings,
floors, soffits and fences. The residential building industry represents the principal market for
fibre cement products. We believe the level of activity in this industry is generally a function of
interest rates, inflation, unemployment levels, demographic trends, gross domestic product growth
and consumer confidence. Demand for fibre cement building products is also affected by the level of
new housing starts and renovation activity.
Fibre cement products have, across a range of product applications, gained broader acceptance in
Australia and New Zealand than in the United States, primarily due to earlier introduction in
Australia and New Zealand.
Australia
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (which we refer to as the ABS) total dwelling
commencements in Australia increased from 138,520 in calendar year 2009 to 167,160 in calendar year
2010 with detached houses increasing from 100,820 in calendar year 2009 to 106,335 in calendar year
2010. Renovation activity, as measured in local currency expenditures by the ABS has increased from
calendar year 2008 to calendar year 2010 for a total increase over this period of approximately
2.6%. The Housing Industry Association of Australia expects new housing construction and renovation
activity to soften over the short-to-medium term.
Former subsidiaries of ABN 60 developed fibre cement in Australia as a replacement for asbestos
cement in the early 1980s. Asbestos sheet production ceased in the early 1980s and asbestos pipe
production ceased in 1987. Competition has intensified over the past decade in Australia. In
addition to competition from solid wood, engineered wood, wallboard, masonry and brick, two
Australian competitors have established fibre cement manufacturing facilities in Australia and
fibre cement imports are also growing.
New Zealand
According to Statistics New Zealand, new dwellings consents in New Zealand decreased from
approximately 15,381 for the year ended March 2010 to 14,611 for the year ended March 2011.
Residential renovation activity in New Zealand has decreased from year ended March 2009 to the year
ended March 2011 for a total decrease over this period of approximately 6.2%. InfoMetrics New
Zealand believes new housing construction and renovation activity are expected to remain weak
through calendar year 2011, with consents slightly down from 2010.
Competition continues to intensify in New Zealand as fibre cement imports have become more cost
competitive and overseas manufacturers struggling with the global recession look for additional
markets to their existing ones.
Philippines
In the Philippines and other Asian and Middle East (Israel, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab
Emirates) markets, fibre cement building products are used in both the residential and commercial
building industries with applications in ceilings, internal walls, external siding, external
facades and soffits. The residential building industry represents the principal market for fibre
cement products. In general, fibre cement products have, across a range of product applications,
gained broader acceptance in these regions over the last decade. In the Philippines, additional
imported fibre cement products have entered the market. However, in some of the developing markets,
gypsum usage has increased and penetrated into fibre cement applications. Fibre cement and asbestos
cement production facilities are located throughout Asia and exporting between countries is common
practice. We believe that fibre cement has good long-term
growth potential because of the benefits of light-weight and framed construction over traditional
masonry
13
construction. In addition, we believe the opportunity to replace wood-based products, such
as plywood, with more durable fibre cement will be attractive to some consumers in some of these
markets.
Europe
In Europe, fibre cement building products are used in both residential and commercial building
industries with applications in external siding, internal walls, floors, soffits and roofing. We
compete in most segments except roofing and promote the use of fibre cement products against
traditional masonry, gypsum based products and wood based products. Since we commenced selling our
products in Europe in fiscal year 2004, we have continued to work to grow demand for our products
by building awareness among distributors, builders and contractors. Management believes that the
growth outlook for fibre cement in Europe is favourable in light of stricter insulation
requirements driving demand for advanced cladding systems and better building practices increasing
the use of fibre cement in interior applications.
Products
We manufacture fibre cement products in the United States, Australia, New Zealand and the
Philippines. In fiscal year 2004, we commenced our European fibre cement business by distributing
our fibre cement products in the United Kingdom and France. We also manufacture fibre cement pipes
in Australia and previously manufactured fibre cement pipes in the United States. In May 2008, we
ceased operation of our pipe business in the United States. Our total product offering is aimed at
the building and construction markets, including new residential construction, manufactured
housing, repair and remodeling and a variety of commercial and industrial building applications.
We offer a wide range of fibre cement products for both exterior and interior applications. In the
United States and elsewhere, our products are typically sold as planks or flat sheets with a
variety of patterned profiles and finishes. Planks are used for external siding while flat sheets
are used for internal and external wall linings and floor and tile underlayments. Outside the
United States, we also manufacture fibre cement products for use in other applications such as
building facades, lattice, fencing, decorative columns, flooring, soffit lining and ceiling
applications, some of which have not yet been introduced into the United States.
We developed a proprietary technology platform that enables us to produce thicker yet
lighter-weight fibre cement products that are generally lighter and easier to handle than
traditional building products. The first application of this technology has been our
HardieTrim® board. HardieTrim board is a fibre cement trim product that is used on the
exterior of residential and commercial construction to replace traditional wood and engineered wood
trim. HardieTrim board was launched in fiscal year 1999, with the introduction of HardieTrim
HLD board.
We believe that our products provide certain performance, design and cost advantages. The principal
fibre cement attributes in exterior applications is durability and low maintenance, particularly
when compared to competing wood and wood-based products, while offering comparable aesthetics. Our
fibre cement products exhibit superior resistance to the damaging effects of moisture, fire, impact
and termites compared to wood and wood-based products, which we believe has enabled us to gain a competitive
advantage over competing products. Vinyl siding products generally have better durability
characteristics than wood-based products, but typically cannot duplicate the superior aesthetics of
fibre cement and lack the characteristics necessary for effectively accepting paint applications.
Our fibre cement products provide strength and the ability to imprint simulated patterns that
closely resemble patterns and profiles of traditional materials such as wood and stucco. The
surface properties provide a superior paint-holding finish to wood and engineered wood products
such that the periods between necessary maintenance and repainting are longer. Compared to masonry
construction, fibre cement is lightweight, physically flexible and can be cut using readily
available tools. This makes fibre cement suitable for lightweight construction across a range of
architectural styles. Fibre cement is well suited to both timber and steel-framed construction.
14
In our interior product range, our ceramic tile underlayment products provide superior handling and
installation characteristics compared to fibreglass mesh cement boards. Compared to wood and
wood-based products, our products provide the same general advantages that apply to external
applications. In addition, our fibre cement products exhibit less movement in response to exposure
to moisture than many alternative competing products, providing a more consistent and durable
substrate on which to install tiles. In internal lining applications where exposure to moisture and
impact damage are significant concerns, our products provide superior moisture resistance and
impact resistance than traditional gypsum wet area wallboard and other competing products.
In the United States, the following new products were released over the last five years:
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2008, we introduced Artisanâ Lap siding, Artisan
Accent Trim and HardieWrapâ weather barrier. |
|
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2009, we introduced two new siding profiles,
HardieSoffitâ Beaded Porch Panel and HardieShingleâ
Shingle Plank. |
|
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2010, we introduced HardieZoneâ System siding
products. |
|
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2011, we introduced new HardieShingleâ siding,
HardieTrimâ NT3 Boards, two new lap siding products, Artisan Accent Trim
and HardieBackerâ ProGrid cement board. |
In Australia and New Zealand, new products released over the past five years include
Axonâ cladding, Scyon Stria siding, Secura Interior Flooring, Secura Exterior
Flooring and Horizon Lining; in Australia only, new products include: Matrix cladding and
Axent trim; and in New Zealand only, new products include: ShingleSide panel and CLD
Cavity Battens and Rigid Air Barrier.
In the Philippines, new products released over the past five years include Hardisenepa Fascia
Board, Hardiplankâ Siding, Hardifloor Systems and Hardipattern Boards.
Seasonality
Our earnings are seasonal and typically follow activity levels in the building and construction
industry. In the United States, the calendar quarters ending in December and March generally
reflect reduced levels of building activity depending on weather conditions. In Australia and New
Zealand, the calendar quarter ending in March is usually affected by a slowdown due to summer
holidays. In the Philippines, construction activity diminishes during the wet season from June
through September and during the last half of December due to the slowdown in business activity
over the holiday period. Also, general industry patterns can be affected by weather, economic
conditions, industrial disputes and other factors. See Section 3, Additional Information for
Shareholders Risk Factors.
Raw Materials
The principal raw materials used in the manufacture of fibre cement are cellulose fibre (wood-based
pulp), silica (sand), portland cement and water. Pulp has historically demonstrated more price
sensitivity than other raw materials that we use in our manufacturing process. In fiscal year 2011,
the average Northern Bleached Softwood Kraft (which we refer to as NBSK) pulp price was US$978 per
ton, an increase of 30% compared to fiscal year 2010. Input costs are expected to remain high with
NBSK pulp prices forecast to remain at or above US$1,000 per ton.
Cellulose Fibre. Reliable access to specialised, consistent quality, low cost pulp is critical to
the production of fibre cement building materials. Cellulose fibre is sourced from New Zealand, the
United States, Canada, and South America (Chile) and is processed to our specifications. It is
further processed using our proprietary technology to provide the reinforcing material in the
cement matrix of fibre cement. We have developed a high level of internal expertise in the
production and use of wood-based pulps. This expertise is shared with pulp producers, which have
access to appropriate raw wood stocks, in order to formulate superior reinforcing pulps. The
resulting pulp formulas are typically proprietary and are the
15
subject of confidentiality agreements between the pulp producers and us. Moreover, we have obtained
patents in the United States and in certain other countries covering certain unique aspects of our
pulping formulas and processes that we believe cannot adequately be protected through
confidentiality agreements. However, we cannot assure you that our intellectual property and other
proprietary information will be protected in all cases. See Section 3, Additional Information for
Shareholders Risk Factors. We have entered into contracts that discount pulp prices in relation
to various pulp indices over a longer-term and purchase our pulp from several qualified suppliers
in an attempt to mitigate price increases and supply interruptions.
Silica. High purity silica is sourced locally by the various production plants. In the majority of
locations, we use silica sand as a silica source. In certain other locations, however, we process
quartz rock and beneficiate silica sand to ensure the quality and consistency of this key raw
material.
Cement. Cement is acquired in bulk from local suppliers and is supplied on a just-in-time basis to
our manufacturing facilities. The silos at each fibre cement plant hold between one and three days
of our cement requirements. We continue to evaluate options on agreements with suppliers for the
purchase of cement that could fix our cement prices over longer periods of time.
Water. We use local water supplies and seek to process all wastewater to comply with environmental
requirements.
Sales, Marketing and Distribution
The principal markets for our fibre cement products are the United States, Australia, New Zealand,
the Philippines, Canada, and in parts of Europe, including the United Kingdom and France. In
addition, we sell fibre cement products in many other countries, including Belgium, China, Denmark,
Germany, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Malta, Mexico, the Middle East (Israel, Kuwait,
Qatar and the United Arab Emirates), The Netherlands, Norway, various Pacific Islands, South
Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey and Vietnam. Our brand name,
customer education in comparative product advantages, differentiated product range and customer
service, including technical advice and assistance, provide the basis for our marketing strategy.
We offer our customers support through a specialised fibre cement sales force and customer service
infrastructure in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines and Europe (which is
based out of The Netherlands). Customer service support for Europe is based out of The Netherlands.
The customer service infrastructure includes inbound customer service support coordinated
nationally in each country (customer service support for Canada is based out of the United States),
and is complemented by outbound telemarketing capability. Within each regional market, we provide
sales and marketing support to building products dealers and lumber yards and also provide support
directly to the customers of these distribution channels, principally homebuilders and building
contractors.
In the United States, we sell fibre cement products for new residential construction predominantly
to distributors, which then sell these products to dealers or lumber yards. This two-step
distribution process is supplemented with direct sales to dealers as a means of accelerating
product penetration and sales. Repair and remodel products in the United States are typically sold
through the large home center retailers and specialist distributors. Our top four US customers
accounted for approximately 56% of our total USA and Europe Fibre Cement gross sales in fiscal year
2011. In Australia and New Zealand, both new construction and repair and remodel products are
generally sold directly to distributor/hardware stores and lumber yards rather than through the
two-step distribution process, which is generally used in the United States. In the Philippines, a
network of thousands of small to medium size dealer outlets sells our fibre cement products to
consumers, builders and real estate developers, although in recent years, do-it-yourself type
stores have just started to enter the Philippines market. Physical distribution of product in each
country is primarily by road or sea transport, except in the United States where transportation is
primarily by road and, to a lesser extent, by rail.
We maintain dedicated regional sales management teams in our major sales territories. As of 31 May
2011, the sales teams (including telemarketing staff) consisted of approximately 267 people in the
United States and Canada, 62 people in Australia, 21 people in New Zealand, 28 people in the
Philippines, and
16
24 people in Europe. We also employ one person based in Hong Kong who functions as a regional
export salesperson, and who covers markets such as South Korea, Hong Kong, Macau, China and the
Middle East (Israel, Kuwait, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates). Our national sales managers and
national account managers, together with the regional sales managers and sales representatives,
maintain relationships with national and other major accounts. Our sales force includes skilled
trades people who provide on-site technical advice and assistance. In some cases, sales forces
manage specific product categories. For example, in the United States, there are individuals who
may specialise in siding products or interior products, although recent reorganisations have
integrated many of these individuals into collaborative teams. Some interior products sales
representatives provide in-store merchandising support for home center retailers. We also use trade
and consumer advertising and public relations campaigns to generate demand for our products. These
campaigns usually explain the differentiating attributes of our fibre cement products and the
suitability of our fibre cement products and systems for specific applications.
Despite the fact that distributors and dealers are generally our direct customers, we also aim to
increase primary demand for our products by marketing our products directly to homeowners,
architects and builders. We encourage them to specify and install James Hardie® products
because of the quality and craftsmanship of our products. This pull through strategy, in turn,
assists us in expanding sales for our distribution network as distributors benefit from the
increasing demand for our products.
Geographic expansion of our fibre cement business has occurred in markets where framed construction
is prevalent for residential applications or where there are opportunities to change building
practices from masonry to framed construction. Expansion is also possible where there are direct
substitution opportunities irrespective of the methods of construction. Our entry into the
Philippines is an example of the ability to substitute fibre cement for an alternative product (in
this case plywood). With the exception of our current major markets, as well as Japan and certain
rural areas in Asia, Scandinavia, and Eastern Europe, most markets in the world principally utilise
masonry construction for external walls in residential construction. Accordingly, further
geographic expansion depends substantially on our ability to provide alternative construction
solutions and for those solutions to be accepted in those markets.
Because fibre cement products were relatively new to the Philippines, the launch of our fibre
cement products in the Philippines in fiscal year 1999 was accompanied by strategies to address the
particular needs of local customers and the building trade. For example, we established a carpenter
training and accreditation program whereby Filipino carpenters who are unfamiliar with our products
are taught installation techniques. We have also put greater emphasis on building our relationships
with new home developers and builders in order to educate the market on the benefits of our
products in this particular sector.
Fibre cement products manufactured in Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines are exported to a
number of markets in Asia, the Pacific, and the Middle East (Israel, Kuwait, Qatar and the United
Arab Emirates) by sea transport. A regional sales management team managed out of the Philippines is
responsible for coordinating export sales into Asia and the Middle East (Israel, United Arab
Emirates, Kuwait, and Qatar). A regional sales coordinator based in New Zealand is responsible for
export sales to the Pacific Region.
Dependence on Trade Secrets and Research and Development
We pioneered the successful development of cellulose reinforced fibre cement and, since the 1980s,
have progressively introduced products developed as a result of our proprietary product formulation
and process technology. The introduction of differentiated products is one of the core components
of our global business strategy. This product differentiation strategy is supported by our
significant investment in research and development activities.
The following table sets forth our research and development expenditures for the three preceding
fiscal years:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March |
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Research and Development Expenditures (1) |
|
$ |
31.2 |
|
|
$ |
30.4 |
|
|
$ |
28.3 |
|
Research and Development Expenditures as a
percentage of total net sales |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
2.7 |
% |
|
|
2.4 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Included within research and development expenditures for fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009 is
US$3.2 million, US$3.3 million and US$4.5 million, respectively, classified as selling,
general and administrative expenses. |
17
Our current patent portfolio is based mainly on fibre cement compositions, associated manufacturing
processes and the resulting products. Our non-patented technical intellectual property consists
primarily of our operating and manufacturing know-how, which is maintained as trade secret
information. We have increased our abilities to effectively create, manage and utilise our
intellectual property and have implemented a strategy that increasingly uses patenting, licensing,
trade secret protection and joint development to protect and increase our market share. However, we
cannot assure you that our intellectual property and other proprietary information will be
protected in all cases. In addition, if our research and development efforts fail to generate new,
innovative products or processes, our overall profit margins may decrease and demand for our
products may fall.
In addition, the Company has a variety of patents and licenses; industrial, commercial and
financial contracts; and manufacturing processes. While the Company is dependent on the competitive
advantage that these items provide as a whole, the Company is not dependent on any one of them
individually and does not consider any one of them individually to be material. We do not
materially rely on intellectual property licensed from any outside third parties. See Section 3,
Additional Information for Shareholders Risk Factors.
Governmental Regulation
As noted above, on 17 June 2010 we moved our corporate domicile to Ireland and are now subject to
Irish law in addition to the SE Regulations. In addition, we continue to operate under the
regulatory requirements of numerous jurisdictions and organizations, including the ASX, ASIC, the
NYSE, the SEC, the Irish Takeovers Panel and various other rulemaking bodies. See Section 3,
Additional Information for Shareholders Memorandum and Articles of Association for information
regarding Irish company law and regulations to which we are subject.
Environmental Regulation
Our operations and properties are subject to extensive federal, state and local and foreign
environmental protection and health and safety laws, regulations and ordinances. These
environmental laws, among other matters, govern activities and operations that may have adverse
environmental effects, such as discharges to air, soil and water, and establish standards for the
handling of hazardous and toxic substances and the handling and disposal of solid and hazardous
wastes. In the United States, these environmental laws include, but are not limited to:
|
|
|
the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Clean Air Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Occupational Safety and Health Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Mine Safety and Health Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Clean Water Act; |
|
|
|
the Safe Drinking Water Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act; |
|
|
|
|
the Toxic Substances Control Act; |
|
|
|
|
the National Environmental Policy Act; and |
|
|
|
|
the Endangered Species Act, |
as well as analogous state, regional and local regulations. Other countries also have statutory
schemes relating to the protection of the environment.
Some environmental laws provide that a current or previous owner or operator of real property may
be liable for the costs of removal or remediation of environmental contamination on, under, or in
that property or other impacted properties. In addition, persons who arrange, or are deemed to have
arranged, for the disposal or treatment of hazardous substances may also be liable for the costs of
removal or remediation of environmental contamination at the disposal or treatment site, regardless
of whether the affected site is owned or operated by such person. Environmental laws often impose
liability whether or not the owner, operator or arranger knew of, or was responsible for, the
presence of such environmental contamination. Also, third parties may make claims against owners or
operators of properties for personal injuries, property damage and/or for clean-up associated with
releases of hazardous or toxic substances pursuant to applicable environmental laws and common law
tort theories, including strict liability.
Environmental compliance costs in the future will depend, in part, on continued oversight of
operations, expansion of operations and manufacturing activities, regulatory developments and
future requirements that cannot presently be predicted.
18
Organisational Structure
JHI SE is incorporated and domiciled in Ireland.
The table below sets forth our significant subsidiaries, all of which are wholly-owned by JHI SE,
either directly or indirectly, as of 31 May 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
Jurisdiction of |
Name of Company |
|
Establishment |
James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Aust Holdings Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Austgroup Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Australia Management Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Australia Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Building Products Inc.
|
|
United States |
James Hardie Europe B.V.
|
|
Netherlands |
James Hardie Holdings Limited
|
|
Ireland |
James Hardie International Finance Limited
|
|
Ireland |
James Hardie International Holdings SE.
|
|
Ireland |
James Hardie N.V.
|
|
Netherlands |
James Hardie New Zealand Limited
|
|
New Zealand |
James Hardie Philippines Inc.
|
|
Philippines |
James Hardie Research (Holdings) Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Research Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
James Hardie Technology Limited
|
|
Bermuda |
James Hardie U.S. Investments Sierra LLC
|
|
United States |
N.V. Technology Holdings, A Limited Partnership
|
|
Australia |
RCI Pty Ltd.
|
|
Australia |
Property, Plants and Equipment
We estimate that our manufacturing plants are among the largest and lowest cost fibre cement
manufacturing plants in the United States. We believe that the location of our plants positions us
near attractive markets in the United States while minimising our transportation costs for product
distribution and raw material sourcing.
Our manufacturing plants use significant amounts of water which, after internal recycling and
reuse, are eventually discharged to publicly owned treatment works (with the exception of our
Blandon, Pennsylvania and Summerville, South Carolina facilities, which maintain closed loop
systems, at which production was suspended at November 2007 and November 2008, respectively). The
discharge of process water is monitored by us, as well as by regulators. In addition, we are
subject to regulations that govern the air quality and emissions from our plants. In the past, from
time to time, we have received notices of discharges in excess of our water and air permit limits.
In each case, we have addressed the concerns raised in those notices, including the payment of any
associated minor fines and capital expenditures associated with preventing future discharges in
excess of permitted levels.
Plants and Process
Fibre Cement Building Products
We manufacture fibre cement building products in the United States and Asia Pacific. Annual design
capacity is based on managements historical experience with our production process and is
calculated assuming continuous operation, 24 hours per day, seven days per week, producing 5/16
medium density product at a targeted operating speed. Annual design capacity is not necessarily
reflective of our actual capacity utilisation rates for our fibre cement plants by region. Annual
capacity utilisation is affected by factors such as demand, product mix, batch size, plant
availability and production speeds and is usually less than annual design capacity. We manufacture
products of varying thicknesses and density.
We currently have an annual design capacity of 3,390 mmsf and 520 mmsf in the United States and
Asia Pacific, respectively, for our fibre cement building products. Fiscal year 2011 capacity
utilisation, based on this annual design capacity, for our fibre cement building products plants
was an average of 43% and 75% in the United States and Asia Pacific, respectively. As indicated
above, annual design capacity is based on managements estimates. No accepted industry standard
exists for the calculation of our fibre cement manufacturing facility design and utilisation
capacities.
Fibre Reinforced Concrete Pipes
We manufacture fibre reinforced concrete pipes in Australia. Our current annual design capacity for
our fibre reinforced concrete pipes plant is 50 thousand tons.
19
Plant Locations
The location of each of our fibre cement plants is set forth below:
Fibre Cement Building Products
United States Plants Operating
Cleburne, Texas
Peru, Illinois
Plant City, Florida
Pulaski, Virginia
Reno, Nevada
Tacoma, Washington
Waxahachie, Texas
United States Plants Suspended
Blandon, Pennsylvania (1)
Fontana, California (2)
Summerville, South Carolina (2)
Asia Pacific
Australia
Sydney, New South Wales
Brisbane, Queensland (Carole Park) (3)
New Zealand
Auckland
The Philippines
Manila
Fibre Reinforced Concrete Pipes
Brisbane, Queensland (Meeandah) (3)
|
|
|
(1) |
|
We suspended production at our Blandon, Pennsylvania plant in November 2007. |
|
(2) |
|
We suspended production at our Fontana, California and Summerville, South Carolina plants in
December 2008 and November 2008, respectively. |
|
(3) |
|
There are two manufacturing plants in Brisbane. Carole Park produces only flat sheets and
Meeandah produces only pipes and columns. |
While the same basic process is used to manufacture fibre cement products at each facility, plants
are designed to produce the appropriate mix of products to meet each geographic markets specific,
projected needs. The facilities were constructed and are operated so production can be efficiently
adjusted in response to increased consumer demand by increasing production capacity utilisation,
enhancing the economies of scale or adding additional lines to existing facilities, or making
corresponding reductions in production capacity in response to weaker demand.
Except for the Waxahachie, Texas facility, we own all of our fibre cement manufacturing facilities
located in the United States. The lease for the Waxahachie, Texas facility expires on 31 March
2020, at which time we have an option to purchase the facility.
Our three Australian fibre cement manufacturing facilities are not owned by us. One of the leases
expires on 23 March 2016, with an option to renew the lease for two further terms of 10 years
expiring in March 2036. The other two leases expire on 23 March 2019, and contain options to renew
for two further terms of 10 years expiring in March 2039. There is no purchase option available
under our leases related to our Australian sites. Our one New Zealand fibre cement manufacturing
facility is not owned by us. The lease for our New Zealand facility expires on 22 March 2016, at
which time we have an option to renew the lease for two further terms of 10 years expiring in March
2036. There is no purchase option available under our lease related to our New Zealand facility.
We own 40% of the land on which our Philippines fibre cement plant is located, and 100% of the
Philippines plant itself.
Mines
We lease silica quartz mine sites in Tacoma, Washington; and Reno, Nevada. The lease for our quartz
mine in Tacoma, Washington expires in February 2014 (with options to renew). The lease for our
silica quartz mine site in Reno, Nevada expires in January 2014 (with options to purchase).
20
Capital Expenditures
The following table sets forth our capital expenditures for each year in the three-year period
ended 31 March 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement (1) |
|
$ |
39.5 |
|
|
$ |
40.6 |
|
|
$ |
20.0 |
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement |
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
Research and Development and Corporate |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Capital Expenditures |
|
$ |
50.3 |
|
|
$ |
50.5 |
|
|
$ |
26.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The segment includes fibre reinforced concrete pipes manufactured and sold in the United
States at our Plant City, Florida Hardie Pipe Plant, which was closed and ceased operations in
May 2008. |
The Company did not have any material divestitures in the fiscal years ended 31 March 2011, 2010
and 2009.
The significant capital expenditure projects over the past three fiscal years in our USA and Europe
Fibre Cement business include:
|
|
|
commencement of a new finishing capability on an existing product line in fiscal year
2009. As of 31 March 2011, we have incurred US$22.9 million related to this project; |
|
|
|
|
commencement of an upgrade to our supply chain management IT systems. As of 31 March
2011, we have incurred US$4.1 million related to this project; |
|
|
|
|
expenditures related to a new ColorPlus line at our Cleburne plant. As of 31 March 2011,
we have incurred US$5.6 million related to this project; and |
|
|
|
|
addition of 12 foot XLD Trim capability at our Peru, Illinois plant for US$3.6 million
in fiscal year 2011. |
We currently expect to spend approximately US$80 million to US$105 million in fiscal year 2012 for
capital expenditures, including facility upgrades and expansions, equipment to enhance
environmental compliance, and the implementation of new fibre cement technologies. We expect to
fund our capital expenditures through a combination of internal cash and funds from our credit
facilities.
Competitive pressures and market developments could require further increases in capital
expenditures. Our financing for these capital expenditures is expected to come from cash from our
future operations and from external debt to the extent that cash from operations does not cover our
capital expenditures. However, if we are unable to extend our credit facilities, or are unable to
renew our credit facilities on terms that are substantially similar to the ones we presently have,
we may experience liquidity issues and may have to reduce our levels of planned capital
expenditures to conserve cash for future cash flow requirements.
21
22
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
Our management is overseen by a Group Management Team, whose
members cover the key areas of fibre cement research and
development, production, manufacturing, sales, human resources,
investor relations, finance and legal.
Members of the GMT in fiscal year 2011 were:
Louis
Gries BSc, MBA
Chief Executive Officer
Age 57
Louis Gries joined James Hardie as Manager of the Fontana fibre
cement plant in California in February 1991 and was appointed
President of James Hardie Building Products, Inc in December
1993. Mr Gries became Executive Vice President Operations in
January 2003, responsible for operations, sales and marketing in
our businesses in the Americas, Asia Pacific and Europe.
He was appointed Interim CEO in October 2004 and became CEO in
February 2005. Mr Gries was elected to the Companys
Managing Board by CUFS holders at the 2005 Annual General
Meeting (AGM) and continued as Chairman of the Managing Board
until it was dissolved in June 2010.
Before he joined James Hardie, Mr Gries worked for 13 years
for USG Corp, in a variety of roles in research, plant quality
and production, product and plant management.
He has a Bachelor of Science in Mathematics from the University
of Illinois, USA and an MBA from California State University,
Long Beach, California, USA.
Russell
Chenu BCom, MBA
Chief
Financial Officer
Age 61
Russell Chenu joined James Hardie as Interim CFO in October 2004
and was appointed CFO in February 2005. He was elected to the
Companys Managing Board by CUFS holders at the 2005 AGM,
re-elected in 2008 and continued as a member of the Managing
Board until it was dissolved in June 2010.
Mr Chenu is an experienced corporate and finance executive who
has held senior finance and management positions with a number
of Australian publicly-listed companies. In a number of these
senior roles, he has been engaged in significant strategic
business planning and business change, including several
turnarounds, new market expansions and management leadership
initiatives.
Mr Chenu has a Bachelor of Commerce from the University of
Melbourne and an MBA from Macquarie Graduate School of
Management, Australia.
Robert
Cox BA, MA, JD
Chief
Legal Officer
Age 57
Robert Cox commenced as James Hardies General Counsel in
January 2008. He joined the Companys Managing Board as
Executive Director and as Company Secretary effective 7 May
2008. He was elected in 2008 and continued as a member of the
Managing Board until it was dissolved in June 2010 and as
Company Secretary until 29 June 2010. He was appointed
Chief Legal Officer on 13 June 2011.
Before joining James Hardie, Mr Cox was Vice President, Deputy
General Counsel and Assistant Secretary with PepsiCo Inc. During
his five years with PepsiCo, Mr Cox was responsible for
corporate governance and Sarbanes-Oxley/New York Stock Exchange
compliance, and managed the corporate law group and the office
of Corporate Secretary for the Board of Directors.
His experience also includes 10 years as a partner of the
international law firm Bingham McCutchen LLP, at their offices
in Asia and California, where he led the business and
transactions practice group in corporate governance, corporate
securities, mergers and acquisitions, financial services, real
estate, tax and strategic technology transactions.
Mr Cox has a Juris Doctorate from the University of California,
Berkeley, California; a Master of Arts from the John Hopkins
School of Advanced International Studies in Washington, DC,
specialising in International Economics, European Studies and
American Foreign Policy; and a Bachelor of Arts from Wesleyan
University in Connecticut.
Mark
Fisher BSc, MBA
Executive
General Manager International
Age 40
Mark Fisher joined James Hardie in 1993 as a Production
Engineer. Since then, he has worked for the Company as Finishing
Manager, Production Manager and Product Manager at various
locations; Sales and Marketing Manager; and as General Manager
of our Europe Fibre Cement business. Mr Fisher was appointed
Vice President Specialty Products in November 2004,
then Vice President Research & Development in
December 2005. In February 2008, his role was expanded to cover
Engineering & Process Development.
In January 2010, he was appointed Executive General
Manager International, responsible for research and
development, engineering, manufacturing logistics and product
management, as well as the Companys non-US businesses.
Mr Fisher has a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering
and an MBA from University of Southern California.
Sean
OSullivan BA, MBA
Vice
President Investor & Media Relations
Age 46
Sean OSullivan joined James Hardie as Vice
President Investor & Media Relations in
December 2008. For the eight years prior to joining James
Hardie, Mr OSullivan was Head of Investor Relations at St.
George Bank, where he established and led the investor relations
function.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
23
|
Mr OSullivans background includes thirteen years as
a fund manager for GIO Asset Management, responsible for
domestic and global investments. During this period, he spent
time on secondment with McKinsey and Co, completing a major
study into the Australian financial services industry. Mr
OSullivans final position at GIO was General Manager
of Diversified Investments where his responsibilities included
determining the asset allocation for over A$10 billion in
funds under management. After leaving the GIO,
Mr OSullivan worked for Westpac Banking Corporation
in funds management sales.
He has a Bachelor of Arts in Economics from Sydney University
and an MBA from Macquarie Graduate School of Management.
Nigel
Rigby
Executive
General Manager USA
Age 44
Nigel Rigby joined James Hardie in 1998 as a Planning Manager
for our New Zealand business and has held a number of sales,
marketing and product and business development roles with the
Company. In November 2004, Mr Rigby was appointed Vice
President Emerging Markets and in 2006 he was named
Vice President General Manager Northern Division. In
November 2008, he became Vice President General
Manager of the Companys newly-formed US Eastern Division,
responsible for the former Northern and Southern Division
markets and plants.
In January 2010, he was appointed Executive General
Manager USA, responsible for the US business.
Before joining us, Mr Rigby held various management positions at
Fletcher Challenge, a New Zealand based company involved in
energy, pulp and paper, forestry and building materials.
None of the persons above has any familial relationship with
each other or with the Board of Directors listed below. In
addition, none of the individuals listed above is party to any
arrangement or understanding with a major shareholder, customer,
supplier or other entity, pursuant to which any of the above was
selected as a member of senior management.
|
|
24
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
James Hardies directors have widespread experience,
spanning general management, finance, law and accounting. Each
director also brings valuable international experience that
assists with James Hardies growth.
Michael
Hammes BS, MBA
Age 69
Michael Hammes was elected as an independent Non-Executive
Director of James Hardie in February 2007. He was appointed
Chairman of the Board in January 2008 and is a member of the
Audit Committee, the Remuneration Committee and the Nominating
and Governance Committee. Mr Hammes was also a member of the
Re-domicile Due Diligence Committee.
Experience: Mr Hammes has extensive commercial experience
at a senior executive level. He has held a number of executive
positions in the medical products, hardware and home
improvement, and automobile sectors, including CEO and Chairman
of Sunrise Medical, Inc (2000-2007), Chairman and CEO of Guide
Corporation (1998-2000), Chairman and CEO of Coleman Company,
Inc (1993-1997), Vice Chairman of Black & Decker
Corporation
(1992-1993)
and various senior executive roles with Chrysler Corporation
(1986-1990) and Ford Motor Company (1979-1986).
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Current Lead Director of Navistar International
Corporation (since 1996) and DynaVox Mayer-Johnson (listed
in April 2010).
Other: Resident of the United States.
Last elected: August 2009
Donald
McGauchie AO
Age 61
Donald McGauchie joined James Hardie as an independent
Non-Executive Director in August 2003 and was appointed Acting
Deputy Chairman in February 2007 and Deputy Chairman in April
2007. He is a member of the Board, Chairman of the Nominating
and Governance Committee and a member of the Remuneration
Committee.
Experience: Mr McGauchie has wide commercial experience
within the food processing, commodity trading, finance and
telecommunication sectors. He also has extensive public policy
experience, having previously held several high-level advisory
positions to the Australian Government.
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Current Chairman (since August 2010) and
Director (since May 2010) of Australian Agricultural
Company Limited; Chairman (since July 2010) and Director
(since 2003) of Nufarm Limited; Director of GrainCorp
Limited (since 2009). Former Chairman of Telstra
Corporation Limited
(2004-2009).
Other: Chairman Australian Wool Testing Authority (since
2005) and Director since 1999; Former Director of The
Reserve Bank of Australia
(2001-2011);
resident of Australia.
Last elected: August 2010
Brian
Anderson BS, MBA, CPA
Age 61
Brian Anderson was appointed as an independent Non-Executive
Director of James Hardie in December 2006. He is a member of the
Board, Chairman of the Audit Committee and a member of the
Remuneration Committee. Mr Anderson was also Chairman of the
Re-domicile Due Diligence Committee.
Experience:
Mr Anderson has extensive financial and business experience at
both executive and board levels. He has held a variety of senior
positions, with thirteen years at Baxter International, Inc,
including Corporate Vice President of Finance, Senior Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer (1997-2004) and, more
recently, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
of OfficeMax, Inc (2004-2005). Earlier in his career, Mr
Anderson was an Audit Partner of Deloitte & Touche LLP
(1986-1991).
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Current Chairman (since April 2010) and
Director (since 2005) of A.M. Castle & Co.;
Director of Pulte Homes Corporation (since September 2005);
Director (since 1999) and Lead Director (since April
2011) of W.W. Grainger, Inc.
Other: Resident of the United States.
Last elected: August 2009
David
Dilger CBE, BA, FCA
Age 54
David Dilger was appointed as an independent Non-Executive
Director of James Hardie in September 2009. He is a member of
the Board, the Audit Committee and the Remuneration Committee.
Experience: Mr Dilger has substantial
experience in multinational manufacturing operations and a
strong finance background. He has held a number of senior
executive positions, including CEO of Greencore Group plc
(1995-2008),
CEO of Food Industries plc
(1988-1991)
and CFO of Woodchester Investments
(1984-1988).
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Non-executive director of The Bank of Ireland plc
(2003-2009)
serving as Senior Independent Director
(2007-2009).
Other: Former Chairman of Dublin Airport Authority plc
(2009-2011);
resident of Ireland.
Last elected: August 2010
David
Harrison BA, MBA, CMA
Age 64
David Harrison was appointed as an independent Non-Executive
Director of James Hardie in May 2008. He is a member of the
Board, Chairman of the Remuneration Committee and a member of
the Audit Committee.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
25
|
Experience: Mr Harrison is an experienced company
director with a finance background, having served in corporate
finance roles, international operations and information
technology during 22 years with Borg Warner/General
Electric Co. His previous experience includes ten years at
Pentair, Inc., as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer
(1994-1996
and 2000-2007) and Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
roles at Scotts, Inc. and Coltec Industries, Inc. (1996-2000).
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Director National Oilwell Varco (since 2003); Director
Navistar International Corporation (since 2007).
Other: Resident of the United States.
Last elected: August 2010
James
Osborne BA Hons, LLB
Age 62
James Osborne was appointed as an independent Non-Executive
Director of James Hardie in March 2009. He is a member of the
Board and the Nominating and Governance Committee. Mr Osborne
was also a member of the Re-domicile Due Diligence Committee.
Experience: Mr Osborne is an experienced company director
with a strong legal background and a considerable knowledge of
international businesses operating in North America and Europe.
His career includes 35 years with the leading Irish law
firm, A&L Goodbody, including as managing partner
(1982-1994) and opening the firms New York office in 1979.
Mr Osborne contributed to the listing of Ryanair in London, New
York and Dublin and has served on its Board since 1996.
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Current Director, Ryanair Holdings plc (since
1996); Former Chairman, Newcourt Group plc
(2004-2009).
Other: Chairman, Eason & Son Ltd (since August
2010), Chairman, Centric Health (since March 2011); resident of
Ireland.
Last elected: August 2009
Rudy
van der Meer M.Ch.Eng
Age 66
Rudy van der Meer was elected as an independent Non-Executive
Director of James Hardie in February 2007. He is a member of the
Board and the Nominating and Governance Committee.
Experience: Mr van der Meer is an experienced former
executive, with considerable knowledge of international business
and the building and construction sector. During his 32-year
association with Akzo Nobel N.V., he held a number of senior
positions including CEO Coatings (2000-2005),
CEO Chemicals
(1993-2000),
and member of the five person Executive Board (1993-2005).
Directorships of listed companies in the past five years:
Current Chairman of the Supervisory Board of
Imtech N.V. (since 2005); Director LyondellBasell Industries NV
(since August 2010); Former Member of the
Supervisory Board of Hagemeyer N.V.
(2006-2008).
Other: Chairman of the Board of Energie Beheer Nederland
B.V. (since 2006); Chairman of the Supervisory Board of
Univé-VGZ-IZA-Trias (UVIT) Health Insurance (since May
2011); resident of The Netherlands.
Last elected: August 2009
Our CEO, Louis Gries, is an Executive Director on the
companys Board. Mr Gries biographical details appear
in the Group Management Team section.
None of the persons above has any familial relationship with
each other or with the Group Management Team. In addition, none
of the individuals listed above is party to any arrangement or
understanding with a major shareholder, customer, supplier or
other entity, pursuant to which any of the above was selected as
a director.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James Osborne
|
|
Rudy van der Meer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
26
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
The following discussion of our financial condition and results
of operations should be read in conjunction with the
consolidated financial statements and Notes to consolidated
financial statements in this annual report.
OVERVIEW
We intend this discussion to provide information that will
assist in understanding our 31 March 2011 consolidated
financial statements, the changes in significant items in those
consolidated financial statements from year to year, and the
primary reasons for those changes and the factors and trends
which are anticipated to have a material effect on our financial
condition and results of operations in future periods. This
discussion includes information about our critical accounting
estimates and how these estimates affect our consolidated
financial statements, and information about the consolidated
financial results of each business segment to provide a better
understanding of how each segment and its results affect our
financial condition and results of operations as a whole.
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance
with US GAAP. Our discussion in this section includes several
non-GAAP measures to provide additional information concerning
our performance. We believe that these non-GAAP measures enhance
an investors overall understanding of our financial
performance by being more reflective of our core operational
activities and to be more comparable with our financial results
over various periods. In addition, we use non-GAAP financial
measures internally for strategic decision making, forecasting
future results and evaluating current performance. Non-GAAP
financial measures include:
|
|
|
Operating income excluding asbestos and ASIC expenses
|
|
|
Effective tax rate excluding asbestos and tax adjustments
|
|
|
Net income excluding asbestos, ASIC expenses and tax adjustments
|
We have reconciled these non-GAAP financial measures to the most
directly comparable US GAAP financial measure for fiscal years
2011 and 2010 in the Definitions section below at
the end of our Results of Operations discussion.
These non-GAAP financial measures are not prepared in accordance
with US GAAP; therefore, the information is not necessarily
comparable to other companies financial information and
should be considered as a supplement to, not a substitute for,
or superior to, the corresponding measures calculated in
accordance with US GAAP.
Our pre-tax results for fiscal years 2011 and 2010 were affected
by unfavourable asbestos adjustments of US$85.8 million and
US$224.2 million, respectively; Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund (which we refer to as AICF) SG&A expenses
of US$2.2 million and US$2.1 million, respectively;
and ASIC related (recoveries) expenses of US$(8.7) million
and US$3.4 million, respectively. Information regarding our
asbestos-related matters and ASIC matters can be found in this
discussion and Notes 11 and 13 in our consolidated
financial statements.
The Company and
the Building Product Markets
Based on net sales, we believe we are the largest manufacturer
of fibre cement products and systems for internal and external
building construction applications in the United States,
Australia, New Zealand, and the Philippines. Our current primary
geographic markets include the United States, Australia, New
Zealand, the Philippines, Europe and Canada. Through significant
research and development expenditure, we develop key product and
production process technologies that we patent or hold as trade
secrets. We believe that these technologies give us a
competitive advantage.
Our fibre cement products are used in a number of markets,
including new residential construction (single and multi-family
housing), manufactured housing (mobile and pre-fabricated
homes), repair and remodeling and a variety of commercial and
industrial applications (stores, warehouses, offices, hotels,
motels, schools, libraries, museums, dormitories, hospitals,
detention facilities, religious buildings and gymnasiums). We
manufacture numerous types of fibre cement products with a
variety of patterned profiles and surface finishes for a range
of applications, including external siding and soffit lining,
internal linings, facades, fencing and floor and tile
underlayments.
Our products are primarily sold in the residential housing
markets. Residential construction levels fluctuate based on new
home construction activity and the repair and renovation of
existing homes. These levels of activity are affected by many
factors, including home mortgage interest rates, the
availability of financing to homeowners to purchase a new home
or make improvements to their existing homes, inflation rates,
unemployment levels, existing home sales, the average age and
the size of housing inventory, consumer home repair and
renovation spending, gross domestic product growth and consumer
confidence levels. A number of these factors continued to be
generally unfavourable during fiscal year 2011, resulting in
weaker residential construction activity, particularly in the
United States and New Zealand.
Our earnings are seasonal and typically follow activity levels
in the building and construction industry. In the United States,
the calendar quarters ending December and March reflect reduced
levels of building activity depending on weather conditions. In
Australia and New Zealand, the calendar quarter ending March is
usually affected by a slowdown due to summer holidays. In the
Philippines, construction activity diminishes during the wet
season from June to September and during the last half of
December due to a slowdown in business activity over the holiday
period. Also, general industry patterns can be affected by
weather, economic conditions, industrial disputes and other
factors.
Fiscal Year 2011
Key Results
Total net sales increased 4% to US$1,167.0 million in
fiscal year 2011. We recorded an operating income of
US$104.7 million in fiscal year 2011 compared to an
operating loss of US$21.0 million in fiscal year 2010. The
operating income (loss) in fiscal years 2011 and 2010 was
adversely affected by unfavourable asbestos adjustments of
US$85.8 million and US$224.2 million, respectively.
Operating profit excluding asbestos and ASIC expenses decreased
12% to US$184.0 million in fiscal year 2011 from
US$208.7 million in fiscal year 2010.
Net income excluding asbestos, ASIC expenses and tax adjustments
decreased 12% to US$116.7 million in fiscal year 2011 from
US$133.0 million in fiscal year 2010. Including asbestos,
ASIC expenses and tax adjustments, net income moved from a loss
of US$84.9 million to a loss of US$347.0 million. In
fiscal year 2011, tax adjustments include a charge of
US$345.2 million related to the dismissal of RCI Pty
Ltds (which we refer to as RCI) appeal of the 1999
disputed amended tax assessment, which did not result in a cash
outflow for the year ended 31 March 2011. Also included in
tax adjustments for fiscal year 2011 was a charge of
US$32.6 million related to our corporate structure
simplification announced on 17 May 2011.
Our largest market is North America. During fiscal year 2011,
USA and Europe Fibre Cement net sales contributed approximately
70% of total net sales, and its operating income was the primary
contributor to the total Company results. Net sales for our USA
and Europe Fibre Cement business
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
27
|
decreased 2% due to lower sales
volume, partially offset by a higher average net sales price.
Operating income for our USA and Europe Fibre Cement segment
decreased 23% in fiscal year 2011 from fiscal year 2010
primarily due to an increase in input costs (primarily pulp and
freight), lower sales volume, unfavourable cost absorption
driven by lower production volume and higher labour cost per
unit manufactured, and unfavourable manufacturing performance,
partially offset by a higher average net sales price and a
reduction in SG&A expense.
During fiscal year 2011, Asia Pacific net sales contributed
approximately 30% of total net sales. Net sales increased 19%
due to favourable currency exchange rates movements in the Asia
Pacific business currencies compared to the US dollar and
an increase in sales volume and average net sales price.
We do not believe that general inflation has had a significant
impact on our results of operations for the fiscal years ended
31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009.
CRITICAL
ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
The accounting policies affecting our financial condition and
results of operations are more fully described in Note 2 to
our consolidated financial statements. Certain of our accounting
policies require the application of judgment by management in
selecting appropriate assumptions for calculating financial
estimates, which inherently contain some degree of uncertainty.
Management bases its estimates on historical experience and
other assumptions that are believed to be reasonable under the
circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making
judgments about the reported carrying value of assets and
liabilities and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses
that may not be readily apparent from other sources. Actual
results may differ from these estimates under different
assumptions and conditions. We consider the following policies
to be the most critical in understanding the judgments that are
involved in preparing our consolidated financial statements and
the uncertainties that could impact our results of operations,
financial condition and cash flows.
Accounting for
Contingencies
We account for loss contingencies arising from contingent
obligations when the obligations are probable and the amounts
are reasonably estimable. As facts concerning contingencies
become known, we reassess our situation and make appropriate
adjustments to the consolidated financial statements.
Accounting for
the AFFA
Prior to 31 March 2007, our consolidated financial
statements included an asbestos provision based on the Original
Final Funding Agreement governing our anticipated future
payments to the AICF as announced on 1 December 2005 (which
we refer to as the Original FFA).
In February 2007, the AFFA was approved to provide long-term
funding to the AICF, a special purpose fund that provides
compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury and
death claims for which certain former subsidiaries of the James
Hardie Group, including ABN 60, Amaca and Amaba are found liable.
The amount of the asbestos liability reflects the terms of the
AFFA, which has been calculated by reference to (but is not
exclusively based upon) the most recent actuarial estimate of
projected future cash flows prepared by KPMG Actuarial. Based on
their assumptions, KPMG Actuarial arrived at a range of possible
total cash flows and proposed a central estimate which is
intended to reflect an expected outcome. The Company views the
central estimate as the best estimate for recording the asbestos
liability in the Companys financial statements. The
asbestos liability includes these cash flows as undiscounted and
uninflated, on the basis that it is inappropriate to discount or
inflate future cash flows when the timing and amounts of such
cash flows is not fixed or readily determinable.
The asbestos liability also includes an allowance for the future
operating costs of the AICF.
In estimating the potential financial exposure, KPMG Actuarial
has made a number of assumptions. These include an estimate of
the total number of claims by disease type which are reasonably
estimated to be asserted through 2071, the typical average cost
of a claim settlement (which is sensitive to, among other
factors, the industry in which the plaintiff claims exposure,
the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the
action is being brought), the legal costs incurred in the
litigation of such claims, the proportion of claims for which
liability is repudiated, the rate of receipt of claims, the
settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims, the
timing of settlements of future claims and the long-term rate of
inflation of claim awards and legal costs.
Due to inherent uncertainties in the legal and medical
environment, the number and timing of future claim notifications
and settlements, the recoverability of claims against insurance
contracts, and estimates of future trends in average claim
awards, as well as the extent to which the above-named entities
will contribute to the overall settlements, the actual amount of
liability could differ materially from that which is currently
projected and could result in significant debits or credits to
the consolidated balance sheet and statement of operations.
An updated actuarial assessment is performed as of 31 March
each year. Any changes in the estimate will be reflected as a
charge or credit to the consolidated statements of operations
for the year then ended. Material adverse changes to the
actuarial estimate would have an adverse effect on our business,
results of operations and financial condition.
Sales Rebates and
Discounts
We record estimated reductions to sales for customer rebates and
discounts including volume, promotional, cash and other rebates
and discounts. Rebates and discounts are recorded based on
managements best estimate when products are sold. The
estimates are based on historical experience for similar
programs and products. Management reviews these rebates and
discounts on an ongoing basis and the related accruals are
adjusted, if necessary, as additional information becomes
available.
Accounts
Receivable
We evaluate the collectability of accounts receivable on an
ongoing basis based on historical bad debts, customer
credit-worthiness, current economic trends and changes in our
customer payment activity. An allowance for doubtful accounts is
provided for known and estimated bad debts. Although credit
losses have historically been within our expectations, we cannot
guarantee that we will continue to experience the same credit
loss rates that we have in the past. Because our accounts
receivable are concentrated in a relatively small number of
customers, a significant change in the liquidity or financial
position of any of these customers could impact their ability to
make payments and result in the need for additional allowances
which would decrease our net sales.
Inventory
Inventories are recorded at the lower of cost or market. In
order to determine market, management regularly reviews
inventory quantities on hand and evaluates significant items to
determine whether they are excess, slow-moving or obsolete. The
estimated value of excess, slow-moving and obsolete inventory is
recorded as a reduction to inventory and an expense in cost of
sales in the period it is identified. This estimate requires
|
|
28
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
management to make judgments about
the future demand for inventory, and is therefore at risk to
change from period to period. If our estimate for the future
demand for inventory is greater than actual demand and we fail
to reduce manufacturing output accordingly, we could be required
to record additional inventory reserves, which would have a
negative impact on our gross profit.
Accrued Warranty
Reserve
We have offered, and continue to offer, various warranties on
our products, including a
30-year
limited warranty on certain of our fibre cement siding products
in the United States. Because our fibre cement products have
only been used in North America since the early 1990s, there is
a risk that these products will not perform in accordance with
our expectations over an extended period of time. A typical
warranty program requires that we replace defective products
within a specified time period from the date of sale. We record
an estimate for future warranty-related costs based on an
analysis by us, which includes the historical relationship of
warranty costs to installed product. Based on this analysis and
other factors, we adjust the amount of our warranty provisions
as necessary. Although our warranty costs have historically been
within calculated estimates, if our experience is significantly
different from our estimates, it could result in the need for
additional reserves.
Accounting for
Income Tax
We recognise deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities
for the expected tax consequences of temporary differences
between the tax bases of assets and liabilities and their
reported amounts using enacted tax rates in effect for the year
in which we expect the differences to reverse. We record a
valuation allowance to reduce the deferred tax assets to the
amount that we are more likely than not to realise. We must
assess whether, and to what extent, we can recover our deferred
tax assets. If full or partial recovery is unlikely, we must
increase our income tax expense by recording a valuation
allowance against the portion of deferred tax assets that we
cannot recover. We believe that we will recover all of the
deferred tax assets recorded (net of valuation allowance) on our
consolidated balance sheet at 31 March 2011. However, if
facts later indicate that we will be unable to recover all or a
portion of our net deferred tax assets, our income tax expense
would increase in the period in which we determine that recovery
is unlikely.
We evaluate our uncertain tax positions in accordance with the
guidance for accounting for uncertainty in income taxes. We
believe that our reserve for uncertain tax positions, including
related interest, is adequate. Due to our size and the nature of
our business, we are subject to ongoing reviews by taxing
jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to
various positions we assert on our income tax returns. The
amounts ultimately paid upon resolution of these matters could
be materially different from the amounts previously included in
our income tax expense and therefore could have a material
impact on our tax provision, net income and cash flows.
Positions taken by an entity in its income tax returns must
satisfy a more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, assuming
that the positions will be examined by taxing authorities with
full knowledge of all relevant information, in order for the
positions to be recognised in the consolidated financial
statements. Each quarter we evaluate the income tax positions
taken, or expected to be taken, to determine whether these
positions meet the more-likely-than-not threshold. We are
required to make subjective judgments and assumptions regarding
our income tax exposures and must consider a variety of factors,
including the current tax statutes and the current status of
audits performed by tax authorities in each tax jurisdiction. To
the extent an uncertain tax position is resolved for an amount
that varies from the recorded estimated liability, our income
tax expense in a given financial statement period could be
materially affected.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
29
|
RESULTS
OF OPERATIONS
Year Ended
31 March 2011 Compared to Year Ended 31 March
2010
The following table shows our selected financial and operating
data for continuing operations for fiscal years 2011 and 2010,
expressed in millions of US dollars, unless otherwise stated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Favourable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unfavourable)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
$
|
814.0
|
|
|
$
|
828.1
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
353.0
|
|
|
|
296.5
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net sales
|
|
|
1,167.0
|
|
|
|
1,124.6
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(775.1
|
)
|
|
|
(708.5
|
)
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
391.9
|
|
|
|
416.1
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(173.4
|
)
|
|
|
(185.8
|
)
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(28.0
|
)
|
|
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
|
(3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
104.7
|
|
|
|
(21.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest expense
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other (expense) income
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
96.6
|
|
|
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(443.6
|
)
|
|
|
(66.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(347.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(84.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volume (mmsf):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
|
1,248.0
|
|
|
|
1,303.7
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
407.8
|
|
|
|
389.6
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average net sale price per unit (per msf):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
US$
|
652
|
|
|
US$
|
635
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
A$
|
916
|
|
|
A$
|
894
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Sales. Total net sales increased 4% from
US$1,124.6 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$1,167.0 million in fiscal year 2011. Net sales in fiscal
year 2011 was favourably impacted by an increase in the average
net sales price and an appreciation of the Asia Pacific
currencies against the US dollar.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement Net Sales. Net sales
decreased 2% from US$828.1 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$814.0 million in fiscal year 2011 due to lower sales
volume, partially offset by a higher average net sales price.
Sales volume decreased 4% from 1,303.7 million square feet
in fiscal year 2010 to 1,248.0 million square feet in
fiscal year 2011, primarily due to weaker demand for our
products in the US caused by the prolonged weakness in housing
construction activity. The average net sales price increased 3%
from US$635 per thousand square feet in fiscal year 2010 to
US$652 per thousand square feet in fiscal year 2011 as a result
of a price increase and a favourable shift in product mix.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement fiscal year 2011 operating income
was 23% below prior year due to an increase in input costs
(primarily pulp and freight), lower sales volume, unfavourable
cost absorption driven by lower production volume and higher
labour cost per unit manufactured, and unfavourable
manufacturing performance, partially offset by a higher average
net sales price and a reduction in SG&A expenses. USA and
Europe Fibre Cement operating income was favourably impacted by
the European business, which delivered a strong result as both
sales volume and average net sales price increased in fiscal
year 2011 compared to fiscal year 2010.
According to the US Census Bureau, single family housing starts,
which are a key driver of our performance, were 446,400 in
fiscal year 2011, 7.3% below fiscal year 2010.
For fiscal year 2011, the average Northern Bleached Softwood
Kraft (NBSK) pulp price was US$978 per ton, up 30.4% compared to
US$750 per ton for fiscal year 2010. Input costs are expected to
remain high with NBSK pulp prices forecast to remain at or above
US$1,000 per ton. In April 2011, the average NBSK pulp price
rose to US$1,020 per ton from US$990 per ton in March 2011.
Similarly, freight costs in the US were higher for fiscal year
2011 compared to fiscal year 2010 with the majority of the
increase impacting the fourth quarter result. Freight costs rose
due to higher truck rates
|
|
30
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
attributed to flatbed truck supply
constraints (as the broader US economy recovers), higher fuel
costs and product mix shifts.
Notwithstanding improved affordability, increasing levels of
household formation and falling inventories of new and existing
houses for sale, a recovery in the sector continues to be
inhibited by a combination of factors such as relatively low
levels of consumer confidence, limited access to credit for
prospective home buyers, falling housing values and the
continued supply of foreclosed properties.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement Net Sales. Net sales increased
19% from US$296.5 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$353.0 million in fiscal year 2011. The higher value of
the Asia Pacific business currencies against the US dollar
accounted for 12% of this increase. The underlying Australian
dollar business results accounted for the remaining 7% increase,
as both sales volume and average net sales price increased.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement sales volume was up 5% in fiscal year
2011 compared to fiscal year 2010 as a strong sales effort
across the region and particularly in Australia delivered
improved results. When combined with the sustained growth in
primary demand for fibre cement and market share gains, these
factors helped to offset a moderation in market conditions in
the second half of fiscal year 2011.
In Australia, increases in mortgage interest rates, along with
wet weather along the eastern seaboard and the end of the
government social housing construction initiative, had a
dampening effect upon the Australian residential housing
construction market in the fourth quarter. According to the
Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), total dwellings approved
increased 3% compared to fiscal year 2010, with detached houses
down 10%.
In Australia, the
Scyontm
branded product range continued to build momentum over the
course of fiscal year 2011. In New Zealand, the business faced
continued challenges as business and consumer confidence fell
during fiscal year 2011 and subsequently the construction of
residential houses fell to historically low levels. The business
has also had to contend with increased competition from imported
products. In the Philippines, sales volume decreased slightly in
fiscal year 2011 compared to fiscal year 2010. Improved sales of
differentiated products and relatively strong underlying market
conditions during fiscal year 2011 were partially offset by a
mechanical failure during the second quarter.
Gross Profit. Gross profit decreased 6% from
US$416.1 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$391.9 million in fiscal year 2011. The gross profit
margin decreased 3.4 percentage points from 37.0% in fiscal
year 2010 to 33.6% in fiscal year 2011.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement gross profit decreased 16% compared
to fiscal year 2010, of which 9% was due to an increase in input
costs (primarily pulp and freight), 6% due to lower sales volume
and 6% due to unfavourable cost absorption and higher labour
cost per unit manufactured driven primarily by lower production
volume, partially offset by a 5% benefit from an increase in
average net sales price. The gross profit margin of the USA and
Europe Fibre Cement business decreased by 5.6 percentage
points.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement gross profit increased 30% compared to
fiscal year 2010, of which 13% resulted from favourable currency
exchange rate movements in the Asia Pacific business
currencies compared to the US dollar. In Australian dollars,
gross profit increased 17%, of which 9% was due to an increase
in average net sales price, 5% due to higher sales volume, 4%
due to improved manufacturing performance and 3% due to lower
fixed unit cost of manufacturing as fixed costs were spread over
higher production volume, partially offset by a 3% detriment due
to increased pulp costs and 1% detriment due to a mechanical
failure in the Philippines facility that occurred during the
second quarter of fiscal year 2011. The gross profit margin of
the Asia Pacific Fibre Cement business increased by
2.8 percentage points.
Selling, General and Administrative (SG&A) Expenses.
SG&A expenses decreased 7%, from US$185.8 million in
fiscal year 2010 to US$173.4 million in fiscal year 2011.
The decrease was primarily due to recoveries from third parties
of US$10.3 million related to the costs of bringing and
defending appeals for certain of the ten former officers and
directors involved in the ASIC proceedings, partially offset by
higher SG&A expenses in the Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
segment. As a percentage of sales, SG&A expenses declined
1.6 percentage points to 14.9%. Further information on
general corporate costs is included below.
ASIC
Proceedings
For the year ended 31 March 2011, we incurred legal costs
related to the ASIC proceedings of US$1.6 million. Our
cumulative net costs in relation to the ASIC proceedings from
their commencement in February 2007 to 31 March 2011 have
totalled US$14.4 million.
During the second quarter of fiscal year 2011, we entered into
agreements with third parties and subsequently received payment
for US$10.3 million related to the costs of the ASIC
proceedings for certain of the ten former officers and
directors. This resulted in a net benefit of US$8.7 million
in fiscal year 2011, compared to an expense of
US$3.4 million in fiscal year 2010. ASIC recoveries are
included as a component of SG&A expense for the year ended
31 March 2011.
See Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements for
further information on the ASIC Proceedings.
Research and Development Expenses. Research and
development expenses include costs associated with
core research projects that are designed to benefit
all business units. These costs are recorded in the Research and
Development segment rather than being attributed to individual
business units. These costs were 8% higher for fiscal year 2011
at US$16.9 million compared to fiscal year 2010.
Other research and development costs associated with
commercialisation projects in business units are included in the
business unit segment results. In total, these costs were 3%
lower for the fiscal year 2011 at US$11.1 million compared
to fiscal year 2010.
Asbestos Adjustments. The Companys asbestos
adjustments are derived from an estimate of future Australian
asbestos-related liabilities in accordance with the Amended and
Restated Final Funding Agreement (AFFA) that was signed with the
New South Wales (NSW) Government in November 2006 and approved
by the Companys security holders in February 2007.
The discounted central estimate of the asbestos liability has
decreased from A$1.537 billion at 31 March 2010 to
A$1.478 billion at 31 March 2011. The reduction in the
discounted central estimate of A$59 million is primarily
due to a reduction in the projected future number of claims to
be reported for a number of disease types.
The asbestos-related assets and liabilities are denominated in
Australian dollars. Therefore the reported value of these
asbestos-related assets and liabilities in our Consolidated
Balance Sheets in US dollars is subject to adjustment, with a
corresponding effect on our Consolidated Statement of
Operations, depending on the closing exchange rate between the
two currencies at the balance sheet date.
For fiscal year 2011, the Australian dollar appreciated against
the US dollar by 13%, compared to a 33% appreciation in fiscal
year 2010.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
31
|
The Company receives an updated actuarial estimate as of
31 March each year. The last actuarial assessment was
performed as of 31 March 2011. The asbestos adjustments for
the fiscal years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
Change in estimates
|
|
$
|
21.5
|
|
|
$
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of foreign exchange movements
|
|
|
(107.3
|
)
|
|
|
(220.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
$
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
|
Claims
Data
The number of new claims filed in fiscal year 2011 of 494 is
lower than new claims of 535 reported for fiscal year 2010, and
below actuarial expectations for the fiscal year 2011.
The number of settled claims in fiscal year 2011 of 459 is lower
than claims settled of 540 for the fiscal year 2010.
The average claim settlement of A$204,000 for fiscal year 2011
is A$13,000 higher than fiscal year 2010 but below the actuarial
expectations for fiscal year 2011.
Asbestos claims paid of A$100.6 million for fiscal year
2011 were lower than the actuarial expectation of
A$117.0 million. The
lower-than-expected
expenditure was due to lower settlement activity and
lower-than-expected
claim settlement sizes.
All figures provided in this Claims Data section are gross of
insurance and other recoveries. See Note 11 to our
consolidated financial statements for further information on
asbestos adjustments.
Operating Income (Loss). Operating income moved from a
loss of US$21.0 million in fiscal year 2010 to income of
US$104.7 million in fiscal year 2011. Fiscal year 2011
operating income includes net unfavourable asbestos adjustments
of US$85.8 million, AICF SG&A expenses of
US$2.2 million and a net benefit related to the ASIC
proceedings of US$8.7 million. In fiscal year 2010,
operating loss included net unfavourable asbestos adjustments of
US$224.2 million, AICF SG&A expense of
US$2.1 million and ASIC expenses of US$3.4 million.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement operating income fell 23% from
US$208.5 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$160.3 million in fiscal year 2011. The decrease was
primarily due to an increase in input costs (primarily pulp and
freight), lower sales volume, unfavourable cost absorption
driven by lower production volume and higher labour cost per
unit manufactured, and unfavourable manufacturing performance,
partially offset by a higher average net sales price and a
reduction in SG&A expenses. The USA and Europe Fibre Cement
operating income margin was 5.5 percentage points lower at
19.7%.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement operating income increased 35% from
US$58.7 million in fiscal year 2010 to US$79.4 million
in fiscal year 2011, of which 13% was attributed to appreciation
of the Asia Pacific business currencies compared to the US
dollar. In Australian dollars, Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
operating income increased 22% primarily due to an increase in
average net sales price, higher sales volume, lower fixed unit
cost of manufacturing as fixed costs were spread over higher
production volume and improved manufacturing performance,
partially offset by higher input costs (primarily pulp) and a
mechanical failure in the Philippines facility that temporarily
halted production during the second quarter of fiscal year 2011.
The Asia Pacific Fibre Cement operating income margin was
2.7 percentage points higher at 22.5%.
General Corporate Costs. General corporate costs
decreased 37% from US$42.9 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$26.9 million in fiscal year 2011. General corporate
costs in fiscal year 2011 have been materially impacted by
US$10.3 million recovered from third parties in respect of
prior period ASIC expenses.
ASIC expenses moved from an expense of US$3.4 million in
fiscal year 2010 to a benefit of US$8.7 million in fiscal
year 2011.
General corporate costs excluding ASIC expenses and domicile
change related costs for fiscal year 2011 increased from
US$30.4 million in fiscal year 2010 to US$33.8 million
in fiscal year 2011 primarily due to a US$7.6 million
non-recurring write-back of a legal provision recognised in
fiscal year 2010.
Net Interest Expense. Net interest expense increased from
US$4.0 million in fiscal year 2010 to US$4.4 million
in fiscal year 2011. Net interest expense in fiscal year 2011
includes a realised loss of US$3.9 million on interest rate
swaps and interest and borrowing costs relating to our external
credit facilities of US$5.0 million, partially offset by
AICF interest income of US$4.3 million. Net interest
expense for fiscal year 2010 includes a realised loss on
interest rate swaps of US$2.5 million and interest and
borrowing costs relating to our external credit facilities of
US$2.2 million, partially offset by AICF interest income of
US$3.3 million.
Other (expense) income. Other expense moved from income
of US$6.3 million in fiscal year 2010 to an expense of
US$3.7 million in fiscal year 2011. This movement is
primarily due to an unrealised loss resulting from a change in
the fair value of interest rate swap contracts of
US$3.8 million in fiscal year 2011, compared to an
unrealised loss of US$0.4 million in fiscal year 2010. In
addition, a realised gain of US$6.7 million was recognised
in fiscal year 2010, which resulted from the sale of restricted
short-term investments held by AICF that did not recur in fiscal
year 2011.
Income tax. Income tax expense increased from
US$66.2 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$443.6 million in fiscal year 2011, as further explained
below. Our effective tax rate on earnings excluding asbestos and
tax adjustments was 31.1% in fiscal year 2011, compared to 34.4%
in fiscal year 2010. The change in effective tax rate excluding
asbestos and tax adjustments compared to fiscal year 2010 is
attributable to changes in the geographic mix of earnings and
expenses, and reductions in non-tax deductible expenses.
We recorded unfavourable tax adjustments of
US$380.7 million in fiscal year 2011 compared to favourable
tax adjustments of US$2.9 million in fiscal year 2010. The
tax adjustments in fiscal year 2011 reflect a
US$32.6 million tax charge arising from our corporate
structure simplification and a non-cash expense of
US$345.2 million following the dismissal of RCIs
appeal of the 1999 disputed amended tax assessment.
RCI strongly disputes the amended assessment and is pursuing an
appeal of the Federal Courts judgment. RCIs appeal
was heard from 16 May 2011 to 18 May 2011 before the
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. Judgment has been
reserved.
With effect from 1 September 2010, we have expensed
payments of GIC to the ATO until RCI ultimately prevails on the
matter or the remaining outstanding balance of the amended
assessment is paid. See Note 14 to our consolidated
financial statements for further information on the ATO Amended
Assessment.
|
|
32
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
Net Loss. Net loss for fiscal year 2011 was
US$347.0 million, compared to US$84.9 million for
fiscal year 2010. Net income excluding asbestos, ASIC expenses
and tax adjustments decreased 12% from US$133.0 million in
fiscal year 2010 to US$116.7 million in fiscal year 2011.
Year Ended
31 March 2010 Compared to Year Ended 31 March
2009
The following table shows our selected financial and operating
data for continuing operations for fiscal years 2010 and 2009,
expressed in millions of US dollars, unless otherwise stated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Favourable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Unfavourable)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
$
|
828.1
|
|
|
$
|
929.3
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)%
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
296.5
|
|
|
|
273.3
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net sales
|
|
|
1,124.6
|
|
|
|
1,202.6
|
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(708.5
|
)
|
|
|
(813.8
|
)
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
416.1
|
|
|
|
388.8
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(185.8
|
)
|
|
|
(208.8
|
)
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
|
(23.8
|
)
|
|
|
(14
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating (loss) income
|
|
|
(21.0
|
)
|
|
|
173.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest expense
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
(33
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other income (expense)
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
(14.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes
|
|
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
|
155.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(66.2
|
)
|
|
|
(19.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(84.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volume (mmsf):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
|
1,303.7
|
|
|
|
1,526.6
|
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
389.6
|
|
|
|
390.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average net sale price per unit (per msf):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
US$
|
635
|
|
|
US$
|
609
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
A$
|
894
|
|
|
A$
|
879
|
|
|
|
2
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Net Sales. Total net sales decreased 6% from
US$1,202.6 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$1,124.6 million in fiscal year 2010 reflecting the
ongoing decline in US housing activity.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement Net Sales. Net sales
decreased 11% from US$929.3 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$828.1 million in fiscal year 2010 due to lower sales
volume, partially offset by a higher average net sales price.
Sales volume decreased 15% from 1,526.6 million square feet
in fiscal year 2009 to 1,303.7 million square feet in
fiscal year 2010, primarily due to weaker demand for our
products in the United States as a result of the downturn in
activity in the US housing construction and renovations market
amid overall weak economic conditions. Although housing
affordability has improved, the reduced availability of mortgage
credit for prospective home buyers, the large inventory of homes
for sale and relatively low consumer confidence continued to
negatively affect demand.
The average net sales price increased 4% from US$609 per msf in
fiscal year 2009 to US$635 per msf in fiscal year 2010 as a
result of a price increase early in fiscal year 2010 and a
favourable shift in product mix.
According to the US Census Bureau, annualised
seasonally-adjusted single family housing starts in March 2010
were 531,000, still significantly below the January 2006 peak of
1.823 million annualised starts.
For the full year ended 31 March 2010, the NBSK pulp price
was US$761 per ton, 7% down compared to US$814 per ton for the
prior year; however during the course of the year, key raw
material and energy costs increased. The average pulp price in
the fourth quarter was 24% higher than in the fourth quarter of
fiscal year 2009, and 9% higher than in the third quarter of
fiscal year 2010 as a result of continued strong demand,
especially from China, and the effects on supply of the Chilean
earthquake in February 2010.
Although production capacity has been re-commissioned as the
NBSK pulp price index has risen, the price of pulp is expected
to remain high in the immediate to medium term. In April 2010,
the average NBSK pulp price rose to US$939 per ton.
Similarly, freight costs were lower for fiscal year 2010,
compared to fiscal year 2009. However, freight costs rose in the
fourth quarter of fiscal year 2010, compared to the third
quarter of fiscal year 2010 and the fourth
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
33
|
quarter of fiscal year 2009, in
response to significantly higher diesel prices amid emerging
signs of a recovery in the United States economy.
Over the full year, the
ColorPlus®
product range continued to increase its penetration rate.
The Companys strategy remains unchanged, with the focus
continuing to be on primary demand growth, product mix shift and
zero to landfill.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement Net Sales. Net sales from Asia
Pacific Fibre Cement increased 9% from US$273.3 million in
fiscal year 2009 to US$296.5 million in fiscal year 2010.
The higher value of the Asia Pacific business currencies
against the US dollar accounted for 7% of the increase, while
the remaining 2% of the increase was due to the underlying
Australian dollar business results. In Australian dollars, net
sales increased 2% due to an increase in average net sales price.
ABS reported a 16% increase in housing approvals in fiscal year
2010 compared to the fiscal year 2009.
Asia Pacific sales volume was stable as increasing volume in
Australia and the Philippines was offset by an 11% decrease in
New Zealand volume, due to a weaker domestic market in fiscal
year 2010, compared to fiscal year 2009.
In Australia, the
Scyontm
branded product range continued to build momentum over the
course of the fiscal year. In New Zealand, sales of
differentiated products also grew in fiscal year 2010.
Similarly, in the Philippines, sales of differentiated products,
primarily thicker board, increased over the full year.
Appreciating local currencies resulted in a 5% decrease in raw
material costs measured in Australian dollar terms for the Asia
Pacific business compared to fiscal year 2009. The vast majority
of this saving relates to pulp which is traded in US dollars.
Gross Profit. Gross profit increased 7% from
US$388.8 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$416.1 million in fiscal year 2010. The gross profit
margin increased 4.7 percentage points from 32.3% in fiscal
year 2009 to 37.0% in fiscal year 2010.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement gross profit increased 5% in fiscal
year 2010 compared to fiscal year 2009. Gross profit benefited
11% as a result of higher average net sales price and 12% from a
reduction of input costs, primarily pulp, energy and freight and
lower warranty expenses. The benefits were partially offset by a
19% detriment due to lower sales volume and a resulting increase
in the fixed unit cost of manufacturing, as fixed costs were
spread over a lower production volume. The gross profit margin
of the USA and Europe Fibre Cement business increased by
5.9 percentage points.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement gross profit increased 16% in fiscal
year 2010 compared to fiscal year 2009. The higher value of Asia
Pacific business currencies against the US dollar
accounted for 8% of the increase. In Australian dollars, Asia
Pacific Fibre Cement gross profit benefited 6% as a result of a
favourable price movement, including product mix shift. In
addition, gross profit benefited 5% from reduced manufacturing
costs and decreased raw material input costs as appreciating
local currencies more than offset increasing costs of raw
materials that are traded in US dollars. These benefits were
offset by higher warranty expenses. The gross profit margin of
the Asia Pacific Fibre Cement business increased by
1.9 percentage points.
Selling, General and Administrative (SG&A) Expenses.
SG&A expenses decreased 11% from US$208.8 million in
fiscal year 2009 to US$185.8 million in fiscal year 2010.
The decrease was primarily due to a favourable
US$7.6 million adjustment to a legal provision following
settlement of a contractual warranty and lower general corporate
costs, partially offset by higher SG&A spending in the USA
and Europe Fibre Cement and Asia Pacific Fibre Cement segments.
As a percentage of sales, SG&A expenses declined 0.9 of a
percentage point to 16.5% in fiscal year 2010. For fiscal year
2010, SG&A expenses included non-claims handling related
operating expenses of the AICF of US$2.1 million.
ASIC
Proceedings
For the year ended 31 March 2010, we incurred legal costs
related to the ASIC proceedings and appeals, noted as ASIC
expenses, of US$3.4 million. These costs were substantially
lower compared to fiscal year 2009, when we incurred ASIC
expenses of US$14.0 million. ASIC expenses are included in
SG&A expenses.
Our net costs in relation to the ASIC proceedings from their
commencement in February 2007 and the appeals to 31 March
2010 total US$23.1 million.
See Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements for
more information.
Chile
Litigation
On 31 December 2009, we entered into a settlement agreement
with El Volcan resolving all outstanding issues between us
relating to the sale of FC Volcan to El Volcan in July 2005.
Under the settlement agreement, we will have no further
obligation to defend or indemnify El Volcan in the antitrust
proceedings commenced by Cementa or Quimel.
El Volcan will now be responsible for its own defense of the
antitrust proceedings, including payment of any final judgments
rendered on appeal. El Volcan will also be required to defend
and indemnify us against any future claims by third parties
related to the management or business of FC Volcan, including
any future antitrust allegations. The terms and conditions of
the settlement remain confidential. All amounts we owed under
the terms of the settlement were paid in full on
31 December 2009. As a result, the amount of the provision
in excess of the settlement amount was reversed, resulting in a
gain of US$7.6 million included in general corporate costs
for the year ended 31 March 2010.
We denied and continue to deny the allegations of predatory
pricing in Chile.
Research and Development Expenses. Research and
development expenses include costs associated with
core research projects that are designed to benefit
all business units. These costs are recorded in the Research and
Development segment rather than being attributed to individual
business units. These costs were 9% higher for fiscal year 2010
at US$15.7 million.
Other research and development costs associated with
commercialisation projects in business units are included in the
business unit segment results. In total, these costs were 24%
higher for fiscal year 2010 at US$11.4 million compared to
fiscal year 2009.
Asbestos Adjustments. The asbestos adjustments are
derived from an estimate of future Australian asbestos-related
liabilities in accordance with the AFFA that was signed with the
NSW Government in November 2006 and approved by our security
holders in February 2007.
The discounted central estimate of the asbestos liability has
decreased from A$1.782 billion at 31 March 2009 to
A$1.537 billion at 31 March 2010. The reduction in the
discounted central estimate of A$245 million is primarily
due to increases in yields on Government Bonds, which are used
for discounting the future cash flows; and a reduction in the
|
|
34
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
projected future number of claims
to be reported for a number of disease types.
The asbestos-related assets and liabilities are denominated in
Australian dollars. Therefore the reported value of these
asbestos-related assets and liabilities in our consolidated
balance sheets in US dollars is subject to adjustment, with a
corresponding effect on our consolidated statement of
operations, depending on the closing exchange rate between the
two currencies at the balance sheet date.
For fiscal year 2010, the Australian dollar appreciated against
the US dollar by 33%, compared to a 25% depreciation in fiscal
year 2009. We receive an updated actuarial estimate as of
31 March each year. The last actuarial assessment was
performed as of 31 March 2010. The asbestos adjustments for
the fiscal years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010 are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Change in estimates
|
|
$
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(162.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect of foreign exchange movements
|
|
|
(220.9
|
)
|
|
|
179.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
$
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
17.4
|
|
|
Claims
Data
The number of new claims filed in fiscal year 2010 of 535 is
lower than new claims of 607 reported for fiscal year 2009 and
also slightly below actuarial expectations for fiscal year 2010.
The number of claims settled of 540 for fiscal year 2010 is
lower than claims settled of 596 for fiscal year 2009.
The average claim settlement of A$191,000 for fiscal year 2010
is in line with fiscal year 2009 and slightly below the
actuarial expectations for fiscal year 2010.
Asbestos claims paid of A$103.2 million for fiscal year
2010 were lower than the actuarial expectation of
A$114.2 million for fiscal year 2010.
As of 31 March 2010, the AICF had cash and investment
assets of A$63.1 million (US$57.8 million). We will
make a contribution of approximately US$63.7 million to the
AICF on 1 July 2010. This amount represents 35% of the
Companys free cash flow for fiscal year 2010, as defined
by the AFFA.
All figures provided in this claims data section are gross of
insurance and other recoveries. See Note 11 to our
consolidated financial statements for further information on
asbestos adjustments.
Operating Income (Loss). Operating income moved from
US$173.6 million in fiscal year 2009 to a loss of
US$21.0 million for fiscal year 2010. The loss for fiscal
year 2010 includes net unfavourable asbestos adjustments of
US$224.2 million (due primarily to the appreciation of the
Australian dollar against the US dollar during the period), AICF
SG&A expenses of US$2.1 million and ASIC expenses of
US$3.4 million.
In fiscal year 2009, operating income included net favourable
asbestos adjustments of US$17.4 million (attributable to
depreciation of the Australian dollar against the US dollar
during the period, partially offset by a change in the actuarial
estimate), AICF SG&A expenses of US$0.7 million and
ASIC expenses of US$14.0 million.
Excluding asbestos and ASIC expenses, operating income increased
from US$170.9 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$208.7 million in fiscal year 2010.
USA and Europe Fibre Cement operating income increased by 5%
from US$199.3 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$208.5 million in fiscal year 2010. The improvement was
driven by lower material input costs (primarily pulp, energy and
freight), higher average net sales price and improved plant
performance which contributed to lower average unit
manufacturing costs. These benefits were partially offset by
lower sales volume and a resulting increase in the fixed unit
cost of manufacturing as fixed costs were spread over
significantly lower production volume. The USA and Europe Fibre
Cement operating income margin was 3.8 percentage points
higher at 25.2%.
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement operating income increased 25% from
US$47.1 million in fiscal year 2009 to US$58.7 million
in fiscal year 2010. Favourable currency exchange rate movements
in the Asia Pacific business currencies compared to the US
dollar accounted for 11% of this increase. In Australian
dollars, Asia Pacific Fibre Cement operating profit for the full
year increased 14% due to strong primary demand growth
offsetting weakened local markets, an increase in average net
sales price, and favourable product mix shift, together with
lower raw materials costs and reduced manufacturing costs. These
benefits were partially offset by an increase in warranty
expenses. The operating profit margin was 2.6 percentage
points higher at 19.8%.
General Corporate Costs. General corporate costs
decreased US$27.7 million from US$70.6 million in
fiscal year 2009 to US$42.9 million in fiscal year 2010. We
incurred costs associated with our Re-domicile of
US$9.1 million in fiscal year 2010, compared to
US$10.3 million in fiscal year 2009. ASIC expenses
decreased from US$14.0 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$3.4 million in fiscal year 2010.
General corporate costs excluding ASIC expenses and domicile
change related costs for fiscal year 2010 decreased from
US$46.3 million in fiscal year 2009 to US$30.4 million
in fiscal year 2010. The reduction was due to a
US$7.6 million reversal of a legal provision and reductions
in other general corporate costs.
Net Interest Expense. Net interest expense increased from
US$3.0 million in fiscal year 2009 to US$4.0 million
in fiscal year 2010. Net interest expense for fiscal year 2010
included AICF interest income of US$3.3 million and a
realised loss of US$2.5 million on interest rate swap
contracts. Net interest expense for the fiscal year 2009
included AICF interest income of US$6.4 million and nil
related to interest rate swap contracts.
Other Income (Expense). Other income moved from an
expense of US$14.8 million in fiscal year 2009 to income of
US$6.3 million in fiscal year 2010. The turnaround resulted
from an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge of US$14.8 million recognised at
31 March 2009 on restricted short-term investments held by
the AICF. Other income for the full year also benefited from a
US$6.7 million (A$7.9 million) realised gain arising
from the sale of restricted short-term investments held by the
AICF, partially offset by an unrealised loss of
US$0.4 million resulting from movements in the fair value
of interest rate swap contracts.
Income Tax. Income tax expense increased from
US$19.5 million in fiscal year 2009 to US$66.2 million
in fiscal year 2010. Our effective tax rate on earnings
excluding asbestos and tax adjustments was 34.4% in fiscal year
2010, compared to 41.4% for fiscal year 2009. The change in
effective tax rate excluding asbestos and tax adjustments is
attributable to changes in the geographic mix of earnings and
expenses, reductions in non-tax deductible expenses and the
reversal of a non-taxable legal provision in operating profit.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
35
|
We recorded favourable tax adjustments of US$2.9 million in
fiscal year 2010 compared to unfavourable tax adjustments of
US$7.2 million in fiscal year 2009. The tax adjustments in
fiscal years 2010 and 2009 relate to uncertain tax positions.
Net Income (Loss). Net loss moved from income of
US$136.3 million in fiscal year 2009 to a loss of
US$84.9 million in fiscal year 2010. Net income excluding
asbestos, ASIC expenses and tax adjustments increased from
US$100.5 million in fiscal year 2009 to
US$133.0 million in fiscal year 2010.
Fiscal year 2010 includes a legal provision reversal of
US$7.6 million. See Note 13 to our consolidated
financial statements for further information on the legal
provision reversal.
DEFINITIONS
Financial
Measures Australian equivalent terminology
Operating income and Operating income margin
is equivalent to EBIT and EBIT margin
Income before income taxes is equivalent to
operating profit
Net income is equivalent to net operating
profit
Non-GAAP Financial
Information Derived from GAAP Measures
The following tables set forth the reconciliation of our
non-GAAP financial measures included in our discussion above to
the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure. These
non-GAAP financial measures are not prepared in accordance with
US GAAP; therefore, the information is not necessarily
comparable to other companies financial information and
should be considered as a supplement to, not a substitute for,
or superior to, the corresponding measures calculated in
accordance with US GAAP.
Operating income excluding asbestos and ASIC
expenses operating income excluding asbestos and
ASIC expenses is not measures of financial performance under US
GAAP and should not be considered to be more meaningful than
operating income. We have included these financial measures to
provide investors with an alternative method for assessing our
operating results in a manner that is focussed on the
performance of our ongoing operations and provide useful
information regarding our financial condition and results of
operations. We use these non-US GAAP measures for the same
purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
USA and Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
$
|
160.3
|
|
|
$
|
208.5
|
|
|
$
|
199.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
79.4
|
|
|
|
58.7
|
|
|
|
47.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Research and Development
|
|
|
(20.1
|
)
|
|
|
(19.0
|
)
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General Corporate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
General corporate costs
|
|
|
(26.9
|
)
|
|
|
(42.9
|
)
|
|
|
(70.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
AICF SG&A expenses
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total operating income (loss)
|
|
$
|
104.7
|
|
|
$
|
(21.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
173.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excluding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
85.8
|
|
|
|
224.2
|
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
AICF SG&A expenses
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASIC related (recoveries) expenses
|
|
|
(8.7
|
)
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Operating income excluding asbestos and ASIC expenses
|
|
$
|
184.0
|
|
|
$
|
208.7
|
|
|
$
|
170.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
Effective tax rate excluding asbestos and tax
adjustments Effective tax rate excluding
asbestos and tax adjustments is not a measure of financial
performance under US GAAP and should not be considered to be
more meaningful than effective tax rate. We have included this
financial measure to provide investors with an alternative
method for assessing our operating results in a manner that is
focussed on the performance of our ongoing operations. We use
this non-US GAAP measure for the same purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
$
|
96.6
|
|
|
$
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
155.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excluding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
85.8
|
|
|
|
224.2
|
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
AICF SG&A expenses
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
AICF interest income
|
|
|
(4.3)
|
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
(Gain) impairment on AICF investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income before income taxes excluding asbestos and ASIC expenses
|
|
$
|
180.3
|
|
|
$
|
197.6
|
|
|
$
|
147.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
$
|
(443.6)
|
|
|
$
|
(66.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excluding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax expense (benefit) related to asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
(48.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax
adjustments1
|
|
|
380.7
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense excluding tax effect of asbestos adjustments
and tax adjustments
|
|
$
|
(56.0)
|
|
|
$
|
(68.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(61.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate
|
|
|
(459.2)%
|
|
|
|
354.0
|
%
|
|
|
12.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective tax rate excluding asbestos and tax adjustments
|
|
|
31.1%
|
|
|
|
34.4
|
%
|
|
|
41.4
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
Net income excluding asbestos, ASIC expenses and tax
adjustments Net income excluding asbestos, ASIC
expenses and tax adjustments is not a measure of financial
performance under US GAAP and should not be considered to be
more meaningful than net income. We have included this financial
measure to provide investors with an alternative method for
assessing our operating results in a manner that is focussed on
the performance of our ongoing operations. We use this non-US
GAAP measure for the same purposes.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(347.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(84.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Excluding:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
85.8
|
|
|
|
224.2
|
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
AICF SG&A expenses
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
AICF interest income
|
|
|
(4.3
|
)
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
(6.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
(Gain) impairment on AICF investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.7
|
)
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax expense (benefit) related to asbestos
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
(48.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
ASIC related (recoveries) expenses
|
|
|
(7.6
|
)
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax
adjustments1
|
|
|
380.7
|
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income excluding asbestos, ASIC expenses and tax adjustments
|
|
$
|
116.7
|
|
|
$
|
133.0
|
|
|
$
|
100.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Fiscal year 2011 includes a charge
of US$345.2 million related to the dismissal of RCIs
appeal of the 1999 disputed amended tax assessment and a charge
of US$32.6 million arising from our corporate structure
simplification announced on 17 May 2011.
|
Impact of Recent
Accounting Pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU
No. 2010-06,
which requires new fair value disclosures pertaining to
significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and
Level 2 fair value measurements and the reasons for the
transfers and activity. For Level 3 fair value
measurements, purchases, sales, issuances and settlements must
be reported on a gross basis. Further, additional disclosures
are required by class of assets or liabilities, as well as
inputs used to measure fair value and valuation techniques. ASU
No. 2010-06
is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning
after 15 December 2009, except for the disclosures about
purchases, sales, issuances and settlements on a gross basis,
which is effective for fiscal years beginning after
15 December 2010. The adoption of the effective portions of
this ASU did not result in a material impact on our consolidated
financial position, results of
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
37
|
operations or cash flows. We do not anticipate that the adoption
of the remaining portions of this ASU will result in a material
impact to our reported consolidated financial position, results
of operations or cash flows.
In April 2010, the FASB issued ASU
No. 2010-13,
which provides additional guidance concerning the classification
of an employee share-based payment award with an exercise price
denominated in the currency of a market in which the underlying
equity security trades. This update clarifies that an employee
share-based payment award with an exercise price denominated in
the currency of a market in which a substantial portion of the
entitys equity securities trades should not be considered
to contain a condition that is not a market, performance or
service condition. Therefore, an entity would not classify such
an award as a liability if it otherwise qualifies as equity. The
amendments included in this update do not expand the recurring
disclosure requirements already in effect. The amendments in
this update are effective for fiscal years and interim periods
beginning on or after 15 December 2010. The adoption of
this ASU did not result in a material impact on our reported
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Liquidity and
Capital Resources
Our treasury policy regarding our liquidity management, foreign
exchange risk management, interest rate risk management and cash
management is administered by our treasury department and is
centralised in Ireland. This policy is reviewed annually and is
designed to ensure that we have sufficient liquidity to support
our business activities and meet future business requirements in
the countries in which we operate. Counterparty limits are
managed by our treasury department and based upon the
counterparty credit rating; total exposure to any one
counterparty is limited to specified amounts that are approved
annually by the Chief Financial Officer.
We have historically met our working capital needs and capital
expenditure requirements through a combination of cash flow from
operations, credit facilities and other borrowings, proceeds
from the sale of property, plant and equipment and proceeds from
the redemption of investments. Seasonal fluctuations in working
capital generally have not had a significant impact on our
short-term or long-term liquidity. We anticipate that we will
have sufficient funds to meet our planned working capital and
other cash requirements for the next 12 months based on our
existing cash balances and anticipated operating cash flows
arising during the year. We anticipate that any additional cash
requirements will be met from unutilised committed credit
facilities and anticipated future net operating cash flow.
At 31 March 2011 we had net debt of US$40.4 million, a
decrease of US$94.4 million from net debt of
US$134.8 million at 31 March 2010.
Excluding restricted cash, we had cash and cash equivalents of
US$18.6 million as of 31 March 2011. At that date, we
also had credit facilities totaling US$320.0 million, of
which US$59.0 million was drawn. The credit facilities are
all uncollateralised and consist of the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
At 31 March 2011
|
|
|
|
Description
|
|
Effective Interest Rate
|
|
|
Total Facility
|
|
|
Principal Drawn
|
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
September 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
50.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
December 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
February 2013
|
|
|
1.02%
|
|
|
|
90.0
|
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
February 2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
320.0
|
|
|
$
|
59.0
|
|
|
The weighted average interest rate on the Companys total
debt was 1.02% and 0.92% at 31 March 2011 and 2010,
respectively, and the weighted average term of all debt
facilities is 1.9 years at 31 March 2011.
On 16 June 2010, US$161.7 million of our term
facilities matured, which included US$95.0 million of term
facilities that were outstanding at 31 March 2010. We did
not refinance these facilities. Accordingly, amounts outstanding
under these facilities were repaid by using longer-term
facilities.
We replaced term facilities in the amount of
US$45.0 million that matured in February 2011 with new term
facilities totalling US$100.0 million. These facilities
became available to us in February 2011. US$50.0 million of
these facilities mature in September 2012 and
US$50.0 million of these facilities mature in February
2014. At 31 March 2011, no amounts were outstanding under
these new term facilities.
We draw on and repay amounts available under our term facilities
throughout the financial year. During fiscal year 2011, we drew
down US$460.0 million and repaid US$555.0 million of
our term facilities. The weighted average remaining term of the
total credit facilities of US$320.0 million at
31 March 2011 was 1.9 years.
ATO
1999 Disputed Amended Assessment
In March 2006, RCI received an amended assessment from the ATO
in respect of RCIs income tax return for the year ended
31 March 1999.
On 30 May 2007, the ATO issued a Notice of Decision
disallowing our objection to the amended assessment (which we
refer to as the Objection Decision). On 11 July 2007, we
filed an application appealing the Objection Decision with the
Federal Court of Australia. The matter was heard before the
Federal Court in September 2009. On 1 September 2010, the
Federal Court dismissed RCIs appeal.
Prior to the Federal Courts decision on RCIs appeal,
we believed it was more-likely-than-not that the tax position
reported in RCIs tax return for the 1999 financial year
would be upheld on appeal. As a result, until 31 August
2010, we treated the payment of 50% of the amended assessment,
GIC and interest accrued on amounts paid to the ATO with respect
to the amended assessment as a deposit on our consolidated
balance sheet.
As a result of the Federal Courts decision, we re-assessed
our tax position with respect to the amended assessment and
concluded that the more-likely-than-not recognition
threshold as prescribed by US GAAP was
|
|
38
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
no longer met. Accordingly,
effective 1 September 2010, we removed the deposit with the
ATO from our consolidated balance sheet and recognised an
expense of US$345.2 million (A$388.0 million) on our
consolidated statement of operations for the fiscal year ended
31 March 2011, which did not result in a cash outflow for
the year ended 31 March 2011. In addition, we recognised an
uncertain tax position of US$190.4 million
(A$184.3 million) on our consolidated balance sheet
relating to the unpaid portion of the amended assessment.
RCI strongly disputes the amended assessment and is pursuing an
appeal of the Federal Courts judgment. RCIs appeal
was heard from 16 May 2011 to 18 May 2011 before the
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. Judgment has been
reserved.
With effect from 1 September 2010, we expense payments of
GIC to the ATO until RCI ultimately prevails on the matter or
the remaining outstanding balance of the amended assessment is
paid.
ASIC
Proceedings
On 17 December 2010, the New South Wales Court of Appeal
dismissed our appeal against Justice Gzells judgment and
ASICs cross appeals against the appellants. On 6 May
2011, the Court of Appeal rendered judgment in the exoneration,
penalty and cost matter for certain former officers.
The Company was ordered to pay a portion of the costs incurred
by ASIC for each of the first instance proceedings and appeal.
The amount of such costs we are required to pay is contingent on
a number of factors, which include, without limitation, whether
such costs are deemed to be valid and reasonable legal costs
relating to each of the first instance and appeal proceedings
and whether such costs are properly allocated and directly
attributable to each of the first instance proceedings and
appeal proceedings.
In light of the uncertainty surrounding the amount of such
costs, we have not recorded any provision for such costs at
31 March 2011. Losses and expenses arising from the ASIC
proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash
flows.
See Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements for
further information on the ASIC Proceedings.
If we are unable to extend our credit facilities, or are unable
to renew our credit facilities on terms that are substantially
similar to the ones we presently have, we may experience
liquidity issues and may have to reduce our levels of planned
capital expenditures, suspend dividend payments
and/or share
buy-back programs, or take other measures to conserve cash in
order to meet our future cash flow requirements.
As of 31 March 2011, our management believes that we were
in compliance with all restrictive covenants contained in our
credit facility agreements. Under the most restrictive of these
covenants, we (i) are required to maintain certain ratios
of indebtedness to equity which do not exceed certain maximums,
excluding assets, liabilities and other balance sheet items of
the AICF, Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew Mining Pty Limited;
(ii) must maintain a minimum level of net worth, excluding
assets, liabilities and other balance sheet items of the AICF;
for these purposes net worth means the sum of the
par value (or value stated in the books of the James Hardie
Group) of the capital stock (but excluding treasury stock and
capital stock subscribed or unissued) of the James Hardie Group,
the paid in capital and retained earnings of the James Hardie
Group and the aggregate amount of provisions made by the James
Hardie Group for asbestos related liabilities, in each case, as
such amounts would be shown in the consolidated balance sheet of
the James Hardie Group if Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew Mining
Pty Limited were not accounted for as subsidiaries of the
Company; (iii) must meet or exceed a minimum ratio of
earnings before interest and taxes to net interest charges,
excluding all income, expense and other profit and loss
statement impacts of the AICF, Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew
Mining Pty Limited; and (iv) must ensure that no more than
35% of Free Cash Flow (as defined in the AFFA) in any given
Financial Year is contributed to the AICF on the payment dates
under the AFFA in the next following Financial Year. The limit
does not apply to payments of interest to the AICF. Such limits
are consistent with the contractual liabilities of the
Performing Subsidiary and us under the AFFA.
Cash
Flow Year Ended 31 March 2011 compared to Year
ended 31 March 2010
Net operating cash flow declined US$35.9 million from
US$183.1 million in fiscal year 2010 to
US$147.2 million in fiscal year 2011. Net operating cash
flow in fiscal year 2011 included a contribution of
US$63.7 million to AICF on 1 July 2010, compared with
nil in fiscal year 2010.
Excluding the contribution to AICF, net operating cash flow was
US$210.9 million for the full year, up by 15% on
US$183.1 million in the prior year. The increase in net
operating cash flow was primarily due to reductions in trade
receivables during the year ended 31 March 2011, partially
offset by a decline in earnings from operations relative to the
prior year and a payment of US$18.6 million for taxes on
re-domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland.
Historically, we have generated cash from operations before
accounting for unusual or discrete large cash outflows.
Therefore, in periods when we do not incur any unusual or
discrete large cash outflows, we expect that net operating cash
flow will be the primary source of liquidity to fund business
activities. In periods where cash flows from operations are
insufficient to fund all business activities, we expect to rely
more significantly on available credit facilities and other
sources of working capital.
Net cash used in investing activities decreased from
US$50.5 million in fiscal year 2010 to US$49.6 million
in fiscal year 2011 as capital expenditures decreased slightly
from the prior year.
Net cash used in financing activities decreased from
US$159.0 million to US$89.7 million primarily due to
the repayment of our
364-day
facilities of US$93.3 million in fiscal year 2010,
partially offset by a reduction in our outstanding term
facilities of US$95.0 million during fiscal year 2011
compared to reduction of US$76.7 million during fiscal year
2010.
Capital
Requirements and Resources
Our capital requirements consist of expansion, renovation and
maintenance of our production facilities and construction of new
facilities. Our working capital requirements, consisting
primarily of inventory and accounts receivable and payable,
fluctuate seasonally during months of the year when overall
construction and renovation activity volumes increase.
During the fiscal year ended 31 March 2011, we met our
capital expenditure requirements through a combination of
internal cash and funds from our credit facilities. We currently
expect to spend approximately US$80 million to
US$105 million in fiscal year 2012 for capital
expenditures, including facility upgrades and expansions and
equipment to enhance environmental compliance.
We anticipate that our cash flows from operations, net of
estimated payments under the AFFA, will be sufficient to fund
our planned capital
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
39
|
expenditure and working capital
requirements in the short-term. If we do not generate sufficient
cash from operations to fund our planned capital expenditures
and working capital requirements, we believe the cash and cash
equivalents of US$18.6 million at 31 March 2011 and
the cash that we anticipate will be available to us under credit
facilities, will be sufficient to meet any cash shortfalls
during at least the next 12 months.
Subject to the terms and conditions of the AFFA, we are required
to fund the AICF on an annual basis, depending on our net
operating cash flow. The initial funding payment of
A$184.3 million (US$145.0 million at the time of
payment) was made to the AICF in February 2007 and annual
payments will be made each July, unless quarterly payments are
elected by the Company. The amounts of these annual payments are
dependent on several factors, including our free cash flow (as
defined in the AFFA), actuarial estimations, actual claims paid,
operating expenses of the AICF and the annual cash flow cap.
Further contributions of A$118.0 million
(US$110.0 million) (including interest payments) and
A$72.8 million (US$63.7 million) were made in fiscal
years 2009 and 2011, respectively. Under the terms of the AFFA,
we were not required to make a contribution to the AICF in
fiscal years 2008 and 2010. We expect to make a contribution to
the AICF in fiscal year 2012 of approximately
US$51.5 million. Our obligation to make future
contributions to the AICF continues to be linked under the terms
of the AFFA to our long-term financial success, especially our
ability to generate net operating cash flow.
No dividends were paid to shareholders in fiscal years 2011 and
2010. On 17 May 2011, we announced the adoption of a
capital management policy to distribute between 20% to 30% of
profits after tax (excluding asbestos adjustments, which are
substantially of a non-cash nature in the short-term) in the
form of ordinary dividends and to conduct a more active approach
to capital management which is likely to see us buying back or
issuing shares as our capital needs dictate, subject to the
Boards review and declaration. We expect to resume paying
dividends starting with an interim dividend to be paid following
the November 2011 announcement of our second quarter results.
There is expected to be a further dividend following the May
2012 announcement of our fiscal year 2012 year end results.
In accordance with this policy, we also announced that we will
be seeking to acquire up to 5% of our issued capital via an
on-market share buyback during the next twelve months. The
effect of this policy, in addition to our ongoing obligation to
make contributions to the AICF, is that we expect to be
distributing a significant portion of our operating surplus each
year in the form of ordinary dividends and share buy-backs. In
circumstances where we determine that share buy-backs are not
attractive, special dividends may be considered as an
alternative.
To facilitate the ability to access and distribute surplus cash
flows and earnings of our operating subsidiaries more
efficiently (including for the purpose of making periodic
contributions to the AICF), we have commenced an internal
reorganisation involving simplification of our corporate
structure including some of the arrangements which were
previously part of our Netherlands domicile. As part of this
restructure, we incurred a tax charge of approximately
US$32.6 million in fiscal year 2011, which will be paid in
fiscal year 2012. This charge will not impact our contribution
to the AICF in fiscal year 2012, although it is likely to reduce
the contribution to the AICF in fiscal year 2013 by up to
US$11.4 million in accordance with the terms of the AFFA.
We expect to rely primarily on increased market penetration of
our products and increased profitability from a more favourable
product mix to generate cash to fund our long-term growth.
Historically, our products have been well-accepted by the market
and our product mix has changed towards higher-priced,
differentiated products that generate higher margins than that
of less differentiated products.
We have historically reinvested a portion of the cash generated
from our operations to fund additional capital expenditures,
including research and development activities, which we believe
have facilitated greater market penetration and increased
profitability. Our ability to meet our long-term liquidity
needs, including our long-term growth plan, is dependent on the
continuation of this trend and other factors discussed here.
We believe our business is affected by general economic
conditions, such as level of employment, consumer confidence,
consumer income, the availability of financing and interest
rates in the United States and in other countries because these
factors affect housing affordability and the level of housing
values. Over the past several years, the ongoing
sub-prime
mortgage fallout, rising unemployment, increased foreclosures,
high current inventory of unsold homes, tighter credit and
volatile equity markets have materially adversely impacted our
business. We expect that business derived from current US
forecasts of new housing starts and renovation and remodel
expenditures will result in our operations generating cash flow
sufficient to fund the majority of our planned capital
expenditures. It is possible that a deeper than expected decline
in new housing starts in the United States or in other countries
in which we manufacture and sell our products would negatively
impact our growth and our current levels of revenue and
profitability and therefore decrease our liquidity and ability
to generate sufficient cash from operations to meet our capital
requirements.
Pulp and cement are primary ingredients in our fibre cement
formulation, which have been subject to price volatility,
affecting our working capital requirements. In fiscal year 2011,
the average NBSK pulp price was US$978 per ton, an increase of
30% compared to fiscal year 2010. Based on information we
receive from RISI, a leading provider of information for the
global pulp and paper industry, and other sources, pulp prices
are predicted to remain at or above US$1,000 per ton. To
minimise additional working capital requirements caused by
rising pulp prices, we have entered into various contracts that
discount pulp prices in relation to pulp indices and purchase
our pulp from several qualified suppliers in an attempt to
mitigate price increases and supply interruptions.
Freight costs in the US increased in fiscal year 2011 and are
expected to rise over the short to medium term reflecting supply
constraints for trucks, as the broader economy improves and the
cost of fuel remains high.
The collective impact of the foregoing factors, and other
factors, including those identified in Forward-Looking
Statements may materially adversely affect our ability to
generate sufficient cash flows from operations to meet our short
and longer-term capital requirements. We believe that we will be
able to fund any cash shortfalls for at least the next
12 months with cash that we anticipate will be available
under our credit facilities and that we will be able to maintain
sufficient cash available under those facilities. Additionally,
we may decide that it is necessary to suspend planned dividend
payments
and/or share
buy-backs, scale back or postpone our expansion plans
and/or take
other measures to conserve cash to maintain sufficient capital
resources over the short and longer-term.
|
|
40
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
MANAGEMENTS
DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
(CONTINUED)
Capital
Expenditures
Our total capital expenditures for fiscal years 2011, 2010 and
2009 were US$50.3 million, US$50.5 million and
US$26.1 million, respectively.
Significant capital expenditures in fiscal years 2011 and 2010
included expenditures related to a new finishing capability on
an existing product line. Significant capital expenditures in
fiscal year 2011 also included the addition of 12 foot XLD Trim
capability at our Peru, Illinois plant, the commencement of an
upgrade to the US business supply chain management IT
systems and the commencement of a new ColorPlus line at our
Cleburne, Texas plant.
Contractual
Obligations
The following table summarises our contractual obligations at
31 March 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due
|
|
|
|
During Fiscal Year Ending 31 March
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Total
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013 to 2014
|
|
|
2015 to 2016
|
|
|
Beyond 5 Years
|
|
|
|
Asbestos
Liability1
|
|
$
|
1,698.1
|
|
|
$
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
N/A
|
|
|
$
|
N/A
|
|
Long-Term Debt
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Estimated interest payments on Long-Term
Debt2
|
|
|
14.5
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Operating Leases
|
|
|
103.8
|
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
32.1
|
|
|
|
29.1
|
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
Purchase
Obligations3
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
1,876.0
|
|
|
$
|
23.4
|
|
|
$
|
98.4
|
|
|
$
|
30.9
|
|
|
$
|
25.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
The amount of the asbestos
liability reflects the terms of the AFFA, which has been
calculated by reference to (but is not exclusively based upon)
the most recent actuarial estimate of the projected future
asbestos-related cash flows prepared by KPMG Actuarial. The
asbestos liability also includes an allowance for the future
claims-handling costs of the AICF. The table above does not
include a break down of payments due each year as such amounts
are not reasonably estimable. See Note 11 to our
consolidated financial statements for further information
regarding our future obligations under the AFFA.
|
|
2 |
|
Interest amounts are estimates
based on gross debt remaining unchanged from the 31 March
2011 balance and interest rates remaining consistent with the
rates at 31 March 2011. Interest paid includes interest in
relation to our debt facilities, as well as the net amount paid
relating to interest rate swap agreements. The interest on our
debt facilities is variable based on a market rate and includes
margins agreed to with the various lending banks. The interest
on our interest rate swaps is set at a fixed rate. There are
several variables that can affect the amount of interest we may
pay in future years, including: (i) new debt facilities
with rates or margins different from historical rates;
(ii) expiration of existing debt facilities resulting in a
change in the average interest rate; (iii) fluctuations in
the market interest rate; (iv) new interest rate swap
agreements; and (v) expiration of existing interest rate
swap agreements. We have not included estimated interest
payments subsequent to fiscal year ending 31 March 2017 as
such amounts are not reasonably estimable.
|
|
3 |
|
Purchase Obligations are defined as
agreements to purchase goods or services that are enforceable
and legally-binding on us and that specify all significant
terms, including: fixed or minimum quantities to be purchased;
fixed, minimum or variable price provisions; and the approximate
timing of the transactions.
|
The table above excludes the unpaid portion of the ATO amended
assessment of US$190.4 million as we are unable to
reasonably estimate the timing of settlement. See Note 14
to our consolidated financial statements.
See Notes 9 and 13 to our consolidated financial statements
for further information regarding long-term debt and operating
leases, respectively.
OFF-BALANCE
SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
As of 31 March 2011 and 2010, we did not have any material
off-balance sheet arrangements.
RESEARCH
AND DEVELOPMENT
For fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, our expenses for research
and development were US$28.0 million, US$27.1 million
and US$23.8 million, respectively.
We view research and development as key to sustaining our
existing market leadership position and expect to continue to
allocate significant funding to this endeavor. Through our
investment in process technology, we aim to keep reducing our
capital and operating costs, and find new ways to make existing
and new products.
OUTLOOK
Housing starts in the US continue to be weak as factors such as
relatively high levels of unemployment, low levels of consumer
confidence, restricted access to credit and the supply of
foreclosed homes continue to constrain demand in the housing
market, affected in particular by the lack of stability in house
values that have continued to fall.
Input costs are also expected to remain high with NBSK pulp
index prices forecast to remain at or above US$1,000 per ton.
Freight costs in the US are expected to rise reflecting supply
constraints for trucks, as the broader economy improves, and the
higher cost of fuel.
Activity in the US residential housing sector is expected to
remain relatively flat in both the construction and the repair
and remodel segments for our 2012 financial year.
In the Asia Pacific region, increases in mortgage interest rates
in Australia have continued to dampen activity in the sector,
although the market is expected to remain relatively robust. In
the Philippines, domestic demand continues to provide a strong
operating environment. In New Zealand, housing activity is
likely to remain subdued as housing construction reaches
historic lows in response to weak consumer and business
confidence.
Changes in the asbestos liability to reflect changes in foreign
exchange rates or updates of the actuarial estimate, ASIC
proceeding matters, income tax related issues and other matters
referred to in Forward Looking Statements, may have
a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
41
|
This remuneration report explains James Hardies approach
to remuneration, and has been adopted by the Board on the
recommendation of the Remuneration Committee.
Irish law does not require the company to produce a remuneration
report or to submit it to shareholders. Similarly, the company
is not required under the ASX Corporate Governance Council
Principles and Recommendations or section 300A of the
Australian Corporations Act to submit a remuneration report to
shareholders for a non-binding vote.
However, taking into consideration the companys large
Australian shareholder base, James Hardie has voluntarily
produced a remuneration report for non-binding shareholder
approval for some years and currently intends to continue to do
so. This report provides information similar to that provided by
Australian listed companies in their remuneration reports on the
companys remuneration practices in fiscal year 2011 and
also voluntarily includes an outline of the companys
proposed remuneration framework for fiscal year 2012.
During fiscal year 2011 the Remuneration Committee retained
Towers Watson (in the United States) and Guerdon Associates (in
Australia) as its independent advisers, and the company retained
Hewitt Associates as its external remuneration advisor.
1.
APPROACH TO CEO AND SENIOR EXECUTIVE REMUNERATION
1.1
Objectives
James Hardies remuneration philosophy is to provide
competitive remuneration, compared with US companies, that
emphasises operational excellence and shareholder value creation
through incentives which link executive remuneration with the
interests of shareholders and attract, motivate and retain
high-performing executives.
The companys executive remuneration framework is based on
a
pay-for-performance
policy that differentiates remuneration amounts based on an
evaluation of performance by the business and the individual.
1.2
Policy
Compensation is managed to align remuneration received with
performance achieved relative to peers.
Remuneration packages for senior executives comprise fixed pay
and benefits (which we refer to as Fixed
Remuneration) and variable performance pay (which we refer
to as Variable Remuneration), based on both
short-term incentives (which we refer to as STI) and
long-term incentives (which we refer to as LTI).
The companys policy is for fixed pay and benefits for
senior executives to be positioned at the market median and
total target direct remuneration (comprising salary and target
STI and LTI) to be positioned at the market 75th percentile
if stretch target performance goals are met.
Performance hurdles for target STI and LTI payments are set in
the expectation that the company will deliver profitability and
growth results in the top quartile of its listed US building
products peer group companies. If these performance hurdles are
not met, the amount payable under the STI and LTI components
will be less.
1.3 Setting
Remuneration Packages
Individual remuneration packages for the CEO and senior
executives are evaluated by the Remuneration Committee annually
to make sure that they continue to achieve the companys
objectives and are competitive with developments in the market.
The Remuneration Committee commissions a review from its
independent US compensation advisor of the remuneration
positioning for the CEO and senior executives relative to their
US peers.
The Board makes the final decisions concerning the remuneration
(base salary, employment contract terms, Scorecard
rating, and STI and LTI target, maximum and actual grants) of
the CEO and CFO. The CEO makes recommendations to the Board and
Remuneration Committee regarding the remuneration of senior
executives other than himself. The Remuneration Committee then
makes the final decisions concerning the remuneration of the
remaining senior executives, for review by the Board.
Remuneration decisions are based on the companys
remuneration framework, which is reviewed by the Remuneration
Committee and approved by the Board each fiscal year. Senior
executive remuneration takes into account the individuals
competencies, skills and performance, the specific roles and
responsibilities of the relevant position, advice received by
the Remuneration Committee from external independent
compensation advisers, and other practices specific to the
markets in which the company operates and countries in which the
executive is based or was based prior to any relocation.
Each year the Remuneration Committee reviews and approves a list
of peer group companies which it uses for comparative purposes
in setting remuneration for the CEO, CFO and the companys
senior executives. As the companys main business and most
of its senior executives are in the US, the peer group used by
the company comprises US listed companies exposed to the US
housing market. The same peer group is used to determine
relative performance for that years LTI equity grants.
1.4 Senior
Executives
The companys senior executives in fiscal year 2011 were:
|
|
|
Louis Gries, Chief Executive
Officer1
|
|
|
|
Russell Chenu, Chief Financial
Officer2
|
|
|
Robert Cox, Chief Legal
Officer3
|
|
|
Mark Fisher, Executive General Manager International
|
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby, Executive General Manager USA
|
1 From
1 April 2010 to 17 June 2010 Louis Gries was also
Chairman of the Managing Board. The Managing Board was dissolved
on 17 June 2010 following completion of JHI SEs
re-domicile to Ireland.
2 From
1 April 2010 to 17 June 2010 Russell Chenu was also a
member of the Managing Board.
3 From
1 April 2010 to 17 June 2010 Robert Cox was also a
member of the Managing Board. From 1 April 2010 until
13 June 2011 Robert Cox was General Counsel of JHISE.
|
|
42
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
2.
FISCAL 2011 COMPANY PERFORMANCE AND LINK WITH REMUNERATION POLICY
2.1 Actual
Performance
James Hardies five year EBIT in US$ terms (excluding
asbestos) and five-year A$ Total Return (including dividends and
capital returns) mapped against changes in US housing starts are
shown in the graphs below:
2.2 Market
Conditions and Company Performance
A significant proportion of the remuneration for senior
executives is Variable Remuneration, which is at risk. The
companys remuneration arrangements aim to ensure a link
between the performance of the company and bonuses paid and
equity awarded.
Operating conditions in the US residential housing market
continued to be challenging in fiscal year 2011. A combination
of relatively high levels of unemployment, low levels of
consumer confidence, restricted access to credit and the supply
of foreclosed homes continued to dampen demand. US single family
housing starts (as reported by the US Census Bureau) for the
year ended 31 March 2011 were 446,400 units, down 7.3% from
481,000 units in the prior financial year and down 74% from the
financial year ended 31 March 2006 peak of 1.73 million
units. Repair and remodel activity also continued to decline
during fiscal year 2011.
JHX Total Return
Index vs US Housing starts
In the face of the significant decline in the US housing market
since March 2006, the companys USA and Europe Fibre Cement
business continued to perform strongly in fiscal year 2011, with
revenue down 2% and sales volume down 4% from fiscal year 2010.
As new housing starts have continued to decline, the company has
benefited from the strategic decision to commit additional
resources to increase its share of the repair and remodel market
in recent years.
The Asia Pacific region (comprising Australia, New Zealand and
The Philippines business units) experienced mixed market
conditions, with Australian dwelling approvals increasing 3%,
New Zealand dwelling approvals declining 5% and The Philippines
experiencing strong domestic demand. Despite these operating
conditions, Asia Pacific recorded strong results with revenue up
7% (in Australian dollars).
These solid results compared to the market, particularly
considering the difficult market conditions, were achieved
mainly through:
|
|
|
the companys primary demand growth strategies in each of
our businesses, to achieve further market penetration at the
expense of alternative materials, driving stronger volume; and
|
|
|
its continued success in introducing higher margin,
differentiated products, driving stronger revenue.
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
43
|
The companys EBIT in fiscal year 2011 was also heavily
impacted by raw material costs, in particular higher pulp prices
and freight costs, which increased substantially in fiscal year
2011.
2.3 Performance
Against Scorecard Objective
The Board and Remuneration Committee reviewed the companys
and managements performance under the Scorecard, which
reflects a number of medium term strategic objectives for the
company, and the following results were achieved:
|
|
|
|
Objective
|
|
|
Starting Point
|
US Primary
|
|
|
PDG for the last three fiscal years is as follows:
|
Demand Growth
|
|
|
FY 11 −3.8%
|
(PDG)
|
|
|
FY 10 6.1%
|
|
|
|
FY 09 3.0%
|
|
US Product Mix
Shift
|
|
|
This has focused primarily on ColorPlus penetration.
|
|
|
|
FY11 results are commercial in confidence but exceeded the
results in FY10 and FY09.
|
|
US Zero To Landfill (ZTL)
|
|
|
In the past three years the company has continued to make
significant progress in reducing the amount of waste materials
sent to landfill.
|
|
Safety
|
|
|
The incident rate (IR) and severity rate (SR) over the last
three fiscal years were as follows:
|
|
|
|
IR SR
|
|
|
|
FY
11 1.7 19
|
|
|
|
FY
10 1.7 37
|
|
|
|
FY
09 4.7 54
|
|
Strategic
Positioning
|
|
|
The Company continues to be highly dependent on the US fibre
cement business.
|
|
Legacy Issues
|
|
|
The re-domicile project was completed in mid-2010. The ASIC
proceedings and tax issues are at appeals stage and the loan
facility for the AICF was concluded. The companys
contribution to the AICF in July 2011 is US$51.5 million.
|
|
Managing
During the
Economic Crisis
|
|
|
At the end of FY11, total credit facilities were US$320 million
and net debt was US$40 million. In May 2011, the company
announced a capital management policy to pay dividends of
between 20% and 30% of NPAT and a 5% on-market buy-back.
|
|
Talent
Management/ Development
|
|
|
The company has a strong management team which has delivered
superior results over the past three years.
|
|
2.4 Performance
Linkage with Remuneration Policy
The Executive Incentive Plan for fiscal year 2011 was based on a
Payout Matrix which required management to achieve
both sales above market (which we refer to as Growth
Measure) and strong earnings (which we refer to as
Return Measure). Although the Payout Matrix excluded
legacy costs and included an inherent indexing of the Growth
Measure for new housing starts, it did not include allowances
for:
|
|
|
substantial increases (or decreases) in the US repair and
remodel market; and
|
|
|
substantial increases (or decreases) in input costs.
|
A combination of a substantial decrease in the repair and
remodel market, substantial increases in input costs, together
with other factors, resulted in the US Fibre Cement business
earning a nil payment under its Payout Matrix for fiscal year
2011.
The Board and Remuneration Committee reviewed the reasons for
this result and concluded that the Payout Matrix, which was
indexed to new housing starts, did not account for substantial
variations beyond management control such as changes to input
costs (for example increases in the cost of pulp and freight) or
changes in the repair and remodel market. Taking these factors
into account, the Board and Remuneration Committee concluded
that management had performed well in fiscal year 2011, despite
a very challenging industry dynamic, particularly compared to
its peer group companies. Therefore, the Board and Remuneration
Committee exercised discretion to recognize managements
response to these factors, and determined that such performance
merited an adjustment to the calculation that otherwise would
have applied with a strict application of the Payout Matrix.
Following a review of the operation of the Executive Incentive
Program, the Board and Remuneration Committee determined that:
|
|
|
the US business receive a payment of 16.7% of its maximum STI
under the Executive Incentive Plan, with a follow-on impact on
the result for the corporate component of the plan;
|
|
|
no adjustment be made to the Asia Pacific result; and
|
|
|
the 2012 Payout Matrix should be indexed for changes in the US
repair and remodel market and pulp costs.
|
The Board and Remuneration Committee consider this was an
appropriate response because:
|
|
|
the Board carried out a similar review of bonus payments in
fiscal year 2010 when the external factors would have had the
result of increasing bonus payments (although no adjustment was
determined in that year);
|
|
|
44
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
|
|
|
by indexing the most significant swing factors to the Payout
Matrix results, management will not be penalized (or benefit)
from significant events outside of its control;
|
|
|
a significant proportion of the potential payment for US
participants in the Executive Incentive Plan has been forfeited;
|
|
|
a significant proportion of the potential payment under the
separate LTI transferred to STI because of long-term uncertainty
was also forfeited;
|
|
|
the companys performance compared to its US peer group
based on a range of ratios confirmed that management has
performed well in fiscal year 2011; and
|
|
|
the Board had foreshadowed in the 2010 Remuneration Report that
it reserved the ability to adjust the payout under the Executive
Incentive Plan in limited circumstances.
|
The percentage of each senior executives STI granted and
forfeited in respect of fiscal year 2011 is set out below.
Although the Board considers that management performed well
during fiscal year 2011, all senior executives received
substantially lower STI in fiscal year 2011 compared to fiscal
year 2010.
The Board believes that the remuneration paid to senior
executives in fiscal year 2011 appropriately reflects
managements level of performance during the year. The
Board and Remuneration Committee continue to believe that the
structure of the remuneration framework, including the changes
discussed above are appropriate to focus management on dealing
with the continuing difficult US housing industry conditions and
provide appropriate alignment between senior executives and
shareholders.
2.5 Variable
Remuneration Paid in Fiscal Year 2011
Details of the percentage of the maximum Variable Remuneration
awarded to or forfeited by senior executives for performance in
fiscal year 2011 compared to fiscal year 2010 are set out below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
STI1
|
|
|
|
Hybrid
RSUs2
|
|
|
|
|
Awarded
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
Awarded
|
|
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
69
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
Robert
Cox3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
|
66
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Awarded
= % of fiscal year 2011
Cash STI maximum actually paid. Forfeited = % of fiscal
year 2011 STI maximum foregone. These amounts were paid in cash
under the Executive Incentive Program and IP Plan or as an
additional one-off discretionary bonus. These amounts do not
include the Hybrid RSUs granted following the transfer of LTI to
STI. The cash payments for fiscal year 2011 were paid to senior
executives in June 2011
|
|
2 |
|
Awarded
= % of fiscal year 2011
Hybrid RSUs (transfer from LTI to STI) maximum which actually
granted. Forfeited = % of fiscal year 2011 Hybrid RSUs
(transfer from LTI to STI) which was foregone. The value earned
for performance in fiscal year 2011 was granted in the form of
Hybrid RSUs in June 2011. Hybrid RSUs will vest in June 2013 and
convert to shares, subject to each senior executives
performance rating against the Scorecard.
|
|
3 |
|
Was not eligible for a bonus under
the Executive Incentive Plan in fiscal year 2011 and not granted
any Hybrid RSUs in respect of fiscal year 2011. The bonus
payments set out in the table in section 5.1 represent
accruals only.
|
The tables do not include Relative TSR RSUs and Scorecard LTI
granted for performance in fiscal year 2011 because they are
granted on a dollar value determined by the Remuneration
Committee and would only be forfeited during fiscal year 2011 in
limited circumstances, all of which involve the employee ceasing
employment.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
45
|
3.
DESCRIPTION OF REMUNERATION ARRANGEMENTS IN FISCAL YEAR 2011
3.1 Overview of
Variable Remuneration in Fiscal Year 2011
Senior executives are eligible to participate in one or more
incentive plans which provide for Variable Remuneration.
Eligibility for inclusion in an incentive plan does not
guarantee participation in any future year. Variable
Remuneration is at risk and consists of STIs and LTIs earned by
meeting or exceeding specified performance goals. The
companys Variable Remuneration incentive plans for senior
executives in fiscal year 2011 are set out below:
|
|
|
1 |
|
See section 3.3.1(a) of this
report
|
|
2 |
|
See section 3.3.1(b) of this
report
|
|
3 |
|
See section 3.3.2 of this
report
|
|
4 |
|
See section 3.3.1 of this
report
|
|
5 |
|
See section 4.3.2 of this
report
|
|
6 |
|
RSUs refer to restricted stock
units.
|
|
7 |
|
Previously referred to as Executive
Incentive Program RSUs.
|
|
8 |
|
TSR refers to Total Shareholder
Return.
|
3.2
Scorecard
Both the STI and LTI incentives for senior executives include an
element of a Scorecard rating to ensure continued
focus on financial, strategic, business, customer and people
components, each of which are important contributors to
long-term creation of shareholder value. The Scorecard contains
a number of key objectives, and the measures the Board expects
to see achieved in relation to these objectives. Individual
senior executives may receive different ratings depending on
their contribution to achieving the Scorecard objectives.
Although most of the objectives in the Scorecard have
quantitative targets, the company has not allocated a specific
weighting to any and the final Scorecard assessment will involve
an element of judgment by the Board. The Board may also give
different ratings when assessing Scorecard performance for the
Hybrid RSUs and Scorecard LTI. The Board monitors progress
against the Scorecard annually.
The Scorecard can only be applied by the Board to exercise
negative discretion (ie to reduce the amount of Hybrid RSUs and
Scorecard LTI which will ultimately vest). It cannot be applied
to enhance the maximum reward that can be received.
|
|
46
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
The Scorecard objectives for fiscal year 2011 were unchanged
from fiscal year 2010. The reasons the Board considered these
objectives were appropriate, are set out below.
|
|
|
|
Objective
|
|
|
Reasons
|
Primary Demand Growth
|
|
|
A key strategy for the company is to maximise its market share
growth/retention of the exterior cladding market for new housing
starts and for repair and remodel segments, which it does by
growing fibre cements share of the exterior siding market
and by maintaining the companys share of the fibre cement
category.
|
|
Product Mix Shift
|
|
|
The company aims to maintain its leadership position across the
fibre cement category of the exterior siding market by
developing new products/marketing/manufacturing approaches that
will result in an improved mix of our products and gross margins.
|
|
Zero To Landfill
|
|
|
This measure is a primary contributor to the companys
environmental goals. Improving material yield will reduce
manufacturing costs. In addition, achieving important
environmental, social and governance (ESG) goals reduces risk.
|
|
Safety
|
|
|
Safety of company employees is an essential ESG measure.
|
|
Legacy Issues
|
|
|
Resolution of these issues is a fundamental component of the
companys ESG goals, paving the way to lower risk and more
certainty for all stakeholders.
|
|
Strategic Positioning
|
|
|
Developing and, as appropriate, implementing, alternative
strategic actions for sustainable growth beyond the
companys traditional markets will create shareholder value
through increased profits and diversification for lower risk.
|
|
Managing During the Downturn
|
|
|
With the US building materials industry continuing to experience
a downturn unprecedented in the past 60 years, managing the
company through this time so it can emerge at the end of this
period in as strong or stronger competitive position in the
overall industry is crucial.
|
|
Talent Management/ Development
|
|
|
Management development and capability is important to the
companys future growth.
|
|
Further details of the Scorecard for fiscal year 2011, including
the method of measurement, historical performance against the
proposed measures and the Boards expectations, were set
out in the 2010 AGM Notice of Meeting. Details of the Scorecard
for fiscal year 2012 are set out on page 50 of this report.
The Board will provide an explanation of the final assessment of
performance under the above Scorecard at the conclusion of
fiscal year 2013.
3.3 Details of
Variable Remuneration Components in
Fiscal Year 2011
3.3.1
Short-Term Incentives
The STI target for senior executives, other than the CFO, was
allocated 80% towards corporate goals (under the Executive
Incentive Plan) and 20% towards individual goals (under the
Individual Performance Plan).
The STI target for senior executives was determined as a
percentage of base salary, which in fiscal year 2011 was:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STI Target as percentage of
|
Position
|
|
|
base salary
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
|
|
125%
|
Chief Financial Officer
|
|
|
|
33%
|
Other senior executives
|
|
|
|
60-65%
|
|
Given the continuing lack of stability in the US housing market,
for fiscal year 2011 the Board also determined that 40% of each
senior executives LTI target should be transferred to the
Executive Incentive Plan. Although this component of a senior
executives Variable Remuneration is received in three
years time, it is treated as an STI since the maximum amount
which can be paid is determined at the end of the first year
based on the companys performance in fiscal year 2011, and
then subject to the negative discretion exercisable by the Board
under the Scorecard in a further two years.
(a) Individual
Performance Plan Cash
20% of the STI target for senior executives (other than the
CFO) was allocated to the IP Plan and payable in cash. The
maximum payout for the IP Plan was capped at 150% of the target.
Senior executives who participated in the IP Plan were assessed
by the Board and Remuneration Committee on their individual
performance against specific objectives approved by the Board
and Remuneration Committee. Rewards were based on each senior
executives performance rating at the end of the fiscal
year.
Boards
Assessment of the IP Plan
The IP Plan links financial rewards to senior executives
achieving specific individual objectives that have benefited the
company and contributed to shareholder value which are not
directly captured by the corporate component of the Executive
Incentive Plan.
(b) Executive
Incentive Plan Cash
80% of the STI target for senior executives (other than the
CFO) was allocated to the Executive Incentive Plan and payable
in cash. The maximum payout for the Executive Incentive Plan was
capped at 300% of the target.
In fiscal year 2011, the Board replaced the previous EBIT-based
performance target with a Payout Matrix based on
earnings and sales growth. A separate Payout Matrix
was approved for each business unit. Employees below senior
executive level and US senior executives were eligible for cash
bonuses depending on the Payout Matrix result for their business
unit. The remaining senior executives were eligible for cash
bonuses depending on a combined Payout Matrix result for the
company.
The purpose of the new Payout Matrix performance hurdle was to
ensure that as management increased its top line growth focus,
it did not do so at the expense of short to medium-term returns.
The Executive Incentive Plan for fiscal year 2011 was designed
to encourage senior executives to effectively balance growth and
returns. To achieve strong rewards,
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
47
|
management was required to generate
both strong earnings and sales growth substantially above
market. Higher returns on one measure at the expense of the
other measure could result in lower, or nil, reward.
The Payout Matrix approved by the Board for fiscal year 2011
inherently included indexing for new housing starts but did not
include indexing for the US repair and remodel market or input
prices, in particular pulp. Other factors such as legacy costs
and exchange rate movements were also excluded.
The Board reserved for itself discretion to change the payout
under the Payout Matrix if growth relative to market was below
expectations and the Board determined that the reason for such
performance was outside managements control or as a result
of a management decision endorsed by the Board given an
assessment of market circumstances at the time. For the reasons
described above in section 2.4, the Board determined that
the payout under the US Payout Matrix should be 50% of STI
target (and 16.7% of maximum STI), which also impacted the
corporate Payout Matrix. No discretion was applied to the Asia
Pacific Payout Matrix.
The company does not disclose the Return Measure and Growth
Measure targets, but achieving a target payment for fiscal year
2011 (without indexing for the US repair and remodel market and
pulp prices) would have required performance in excess of the
average of the performance for the previous three years on each
measure.
Board
Assessment of Executive Incentive Plan
The Board believes that the Payout Matrix incentive methodology
remains valid. The Board recognized that by indexing for new
housing starts alone, the fiscal year 2011 Payout Matrix did not
take into account substantial variations in input costs and the
US repair and remodel markets. After a review of the changes
between fiscal year 2010 and 2011, the Board revised the Payout
Matrix to also take into account changes in the cost of pulp and
changes in the repair and remodel market which differed
substantially during the year from expectations at the start of
fiscal year 2011. The Board believes that the revised Payout
Matrix under the Executive Incentive Plan is appropriate because
it:
|
|
|
provides management with an incentive towards achieving the
overall corporate goals;
|
|
|
balances growth with returns;
|
|
|
recognises the need to flexibly respond to strategic
opportunities depending on our markets ability to recover
from the currently prevailing uncertain economic environment; and
|
|
|
incorporates indexing for factors beyond managements
control in the Boards assessment of managements
performance
|
(c) Executive
Incentive Plan Hybrid RSUs
40% of the LTI target for senior executives was allocated
to the Executive Incentive Plan and payable in Hybrid RSUs
(formerly referred to as Executive Incentive Program RSUs). The
maximum initial grant of Hybrid RSUs is 300% of the target.
The number of Hybrid RSUs granted is based on the companys
performance against corporate level EBIT performance
targets approved by the Board. The targets for fiscal year 2011
were derived from the cash Executive Incentive Plan Payout
Matrix for fiscal year 2011 and a payout at target
required an improvement on performance for fiscal year 2010,
indexed to housing starts. The EBIT performance hurdle was:
Before the Hybrid RSUs granted in June 2011 vest in June 2013
and convert to shares, the Board will assess each senior
executives contribution to the long-term objectives set
out in the Scorecard and give them a rating between 0 and 100.
Depending on this rating, between 0% and 100% of the senior
executives Hybrid RSUs will vest and convert to shares. In
effect, the Scorecard applies a holdback and
forfeiture principle to ensure short-term results in
fiscal year 2011 are not obtained at the expense of long-term
sustainability.
Calculation of the Hybrid RSUs at the end of fiscal year 2011 is
described below:
|
|
|
1 |
|
Amount of LTI received as Hybrid
RSUs in the absence of long-term quantitative measures.
|
Worked
Example
Based on the CEOs LTI target quantum of US$2,800,000 in
fiscal year 2011, James Hardies performance of 91% of the
EBIT performance hurdle, resulting in a payment of 25% of target
for fiscal year 2011, and assuming a Scorecard rating of 75 out
of 100 in June 2013 the CEO would receive:
|
|
|
40% x US$2,800,000 x 25% = US$280,800 to be settled in
Hybrid RSUs in June 2011. At the actual value of
US$6.12865/share, this is equivalent to 45,687 Hybrid RSUs.
|
|
|
48
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
At the conclusion of the additional two-year performance period
in June 2013, a number of Hybrid RSUs are forfeited, based on
the CEOs assumed rating under the Scorecard for this
example:
|
|
|
45,687 RSUs x 75% = 34,265 shares received
|
The retention of the 40% transfer of target LTI to STI reflects
the Boards continued concerns about the lack of stability
in the US housing market as well as emphasising continued
profitability as the company seeks to attain its primary demand
growth objectives.
Board
Assessment
The Board believes that Hybrid RSUs and the Scorecard are an
appropriate incentive vehicle in the current market because they:
|
|
|
provide an incentive to ensure that the growth focus underlying
the primary demand growth objective is not achieved at the
expense of short and medium-term shareholder returns;
|
|
|
align management with shareholders because the reward vehicle is
based on share price;
|
|
|
focus on long-term results over the three year performance
period;
|
|
|
focus management on sustainable long-term value creation;
|
|
|
recognise that quantifying a specific long-term financial
outcome requirement is not yet possible in the current market;
|
|
|
avoid a mechanistic formula with outcomes based on market
movements rather than management action; and
|
|
|
allow the collective judgment of the independent directors to
forfeit some or all of the potential value based on
a number of long-term objectives identified by the Board as
being able to affect longer-term outcomes in uncertain economic
times.
|
3.3.2
Long-Term Incentives
The remaining 60% of the LTI target for senior executives was
allocated as grants of RSUs based on the companys total
shareholder return (which we refer to as Relative TSR
RSUs) relative to its peers, plus grants of cash-settled
awards based on the companys stock price performance and
the Scorecard (which we refer to as Scorecard LTI).
The maximum payout under both of these programs was capped at
300% of the target.
(a) Relative TSR
RSUs
30% of the LTI target for senior executives in fiscal year
2011 was allocated as grants of Relative TSR RSUs in September
2010.
The peer group for the Relative TSR RSUs is the same peer group
of companies exposed to the US housing market which the company
uses for compensation benchmarking purposes. The Board and
Remuneration Committee believe that US companies form a more
appropriate peer group than ASX listed companies as they are
exposed to the same macro factors in the US housing market as
the company faces. The names of the companies comprising the
peer group for each grant of Relative TSR RSUs are set out in
section 7 of this Remuneration Report.
The companys relative TSR performance will be measured
against the peer group over a 3 to 5 year period from grant
date, with testing after the third year, and then every six
months until the end of year 5, based on the following schedule:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% of Relative TSR
|
Performance against Peer
Group
|
|
|
RSUs vested
|
<50th Percentile
|
|
|
0%
|
|
50th Percentile
|
|
|
33%
|
|
51st 74th Percentile
|
|
|
Sliding Scale
|
|
³75th
Percentile
|
|
|
100%
|
|
Boards
Assessment of the Relative TSR RSU Component of Long Term
Incentive Plan
The Board considered whether re-testing is appropriate for
Relative TSR RSUs, given some investors prefer a single test for
relative performance measures. The Board concluded that
re-testing is appropriate in the companys circumstances
because the companys share price is subject to substantial
short-term fluctuations relating to public comment and
disclosures on a number of legacy issues facing the company,
including asbestos-related matters, and believes that senior
executives should be given the same opportunity as shareholders,
who may elect to delay disposing of their equity interests when
affected by short-term factors. Further volatility may also be
experienced in the aftermath of the global financial crisis. In
addition, this approach extends the motivational potential of
the Relative TSR RSUs from three to five years, so is more
effective from a cost-benefit perspective.
(b) Scorecard
LTI
30% of the LTI target for senior executives in fiscal year
2011 was allocated as grants of Scorecard LTI awards in June
2010.
Scorecard LTI is a cash-settled award with the final payout
based on the companys share price performance over the
three years from the grant date and the senior executives
Scorecard rating.
At the start of the three-year performance period, the company
will calculate the number of shares the senior executives could
have acquired if they received a maximum payout on the Scorecard
LTI on that date. At the end of the three-year performance
period, the Board will assess each of the senior
executives contribution to the long-term objectives set
out in the Scorecard to give them a rating of between 0 and 100.
Depending on this rating, between 0% and 100% of the senior
executives awards will vest in June 2013. Each senior
executive will receive a cash payment based on the
companys share price at the end of the period multiplied
by the number of shares they could have acquired at the start of
the performance period, adjusted downward in accord with their
Scorecard rating.
Board
Assessment of Scorecard LTI
The Board introduced Scorecard LTI because it considered that a
reward that focused on longer-term strategic and operational
goals was essential, given that specific longer-term financial
objectives cannot be readily determined in the current uncertain
housing market. Ensuring that the rewards value is tied to
share price provides alignment with shareholder outcomes.
Moreover, payment in cash allows flexibility to apply the reward
across different countries, while providing executives with
liquidity to pay tax or other material commitments at a time
that coincides with vesting of shares (via the RSU programs)
such that they are less likely to wish to sell their shares.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
49
|
(c) Long-Term
Incentives Below Senior Executive Level
In fiscal year 2011, selected employees other than senior
executives received equity-based long-term incentives in the
form of RSUs under the 2001 JHI SE Equity Incentive Plan (which
we refer to as the 2001 Plan). Participation in such
a plan helps align the interests of employees with shareholders.
Award levels are determined based on the Remuneration
Committees review of local market standards and the
individuals responsibility, performance and potential to
enhance shareholder value. Unlike the RSUs granted to senior
executives, these RSUs generally vest at the rate of 25% on the
1st anniversary of the grant, 25% on the
2nd anniversary date and 50% on the 3rd anniversary
date. The term of the 2001 Plan expires in September 2011 and
shareholders will be asked at the 2011 AGM to extend it for a
further 10 years.
Boards
Assessment of 2001 Plan
The majority of participants in the 2001 Plan are US employees.
Senior executives named in this report did not receive RSUs
under the 2001 Plan in fiscal year 2011. The RSUs granted to
other employees under the 2001 Plan follow normal and customary
US grant guidelines and market practice and have no performance
hurdles. The Board is satisfied that this practice is necessary
to attract and retain US employees and is particularly effective
in the current environment for the better management of the
companys cash flow.
3.4 Details of
Fixed Remuneration in Fiscal Year 2011
Fixed remuneration comprises base salaries, non-cash benefits,
participation in a defined contribution retirement plan and
superannuation contributions.
3.4.1
Base Salaries
James Hardie provides base salaries to attract and retain senior
executives who are critical to the companys long-term
success. The base salary provides a guaranteed level of income
that recognises the market value of the position and internal
equities between roles, and the individuals capability,
experience and performance. Base pay for senior executives is
positioned around the market median for positions of similar
responsibility. Base salaries are reviewed by the Remuneration
Committee each year, although increases are not automatic.
Following a review of senior executive compensation at the start
of fiscal year 2011, the Board determined that only one of the
companys senior executives would receive a base salary
increase in fiscal year 2011, although two of the senior
executives received base salary increases during fiscal year
2010 following an increase in their job responsibilities.
3.4.2
Non-Cash Benefits
James Hardies executives may receive non-cash benefits
such as a cost of living allowance, medical and life insurance
benefits, car allowances, membership of executive wellness
programs, long service leave and tax services to prepare their
income tax returns if they are required to lodge returns in
multiple countries.
3.4.3 Retirement
Plan/Superannuation
In every country in which it operates, the company offers
employees access to pension, superannuation or individual
retirement savings plans consistent with the laws of the
respective country.
3.5 Relative
Weightings of Fixed and Variable Remuneration in 2011
The substantial reduction in Variable Remuneration paid to
senior executives in fiscal year 2011 compared to fiscal year
2010 is reflected in the reduced percentage of their total
compensation received as Variable Remuneration in the table
below. The amounts below are based on the actual remuneration
received for performance in fiscal year 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remuneration1
|
|
|
Variable Remuneration
|
|
|
|
Salary, Non-cash
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, Superannuation,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relative
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
401(k) etc
|
|
|
Cash
Incentive2
|
|
|
Hybrid
(RSUs)3
|
|
|
Scorecard
LTI4
|
|
|
TSR
RSUs5
|
|
|
Variable
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
20
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
82
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
55
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert
Cox6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
0
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
75
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
64
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
See section 3.4 of this report.
|
|
|
50
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
|
|
|
2 |
|
See section 3.3.1 of this
report. This includes short-term cash incentive paid under the
IP Plan and Executive Incentive Plan or as an additional one-off
discretionary bonus in June 2011 for performance in fiscal year
2011.
|
|
3 |
|
See sections 3.3.1(c) and
3.3.2(a) of this report. This includes long-term incentive paid
under the Long Term Incentive Plan with Relative TSR RSUs
granted in September 2010 and Hybrid RSUs (formerly Executive
Incentive Plan RSUs) granted May 2011 for performance in fiscal
year 2011. This amount includes the actual value of grant
received in respect of fiscal year 2011 rather than the value
used for accounting purposes.
|
|
4 |
|
See section 3.3.2(b) of this
report. This includes awards of Scorecard LTI under the Long
Term Incentive Plan granted in June 2010.
|
|
5 |
|
See section 3.3.2(a) of this
report. This includes grants of Relative TSR RSUs under the Long
Term Incentive Plan granted in September 2010.
|
|
6 |
|
Was not eligible for a bonus under
the Executive Incentive Plan in fiscal year 2011 and did not
receive a grant of Hybrid RSUs, Scorecard LTI or Relative TSR
RSUs in respect of fiscal year 2011.
|
3.6 Variable
Remuneration Payable in Future Years
Details of the accounting cost of the Variable Remuneration for
fiscal year 2011 that may be paid to senior executives over
future years are set out below. The minimum amount payable is
nil in all cases. The maximum amount payable will depend on the
share price at time of vesting, and is therefore not possible to
determine.
The table below is based on the fair value of the RSUs and
Scorecard LTI according to US GAAP accounting standards.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(US dollars)
|
|
Scorecard
LTI1
|
|
|
Hybrid
RSUs2
|
|
|
Relative TSR
RSUs3
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2014
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
760,977
|
|
|
|
932,069
|
|
|
|
932,069
|
|
|
|
114,503
|
|
|
|
140,248
|
|
|
|
26,128
|
|
|
|
466,550
|
|
|
|
866,788
|
|
|
|
397,870
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
85,917
|
|
|
|
105,234
|
|
|
|
105,234
|
|
|
|
14,313
|
|
|
|
17,531
|
|
|
|
3,266
|
|
|
|
58,319
|
|
|
|
108,349
|
|
|
|
49,734
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Cox
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
85,917
|
|
|
|
105,234
|
|
|
|
105,234
|
|
|
|
13,291
|
|
|
|
16,279
|
|
|
|
3,033
|
|
|
|
54,153
|
|
|
|
100,610
|
|
|
|
46,181
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
98,191
|
|
|
|
120,267
|
|
|
|
120,267
|
|
|
|
14,313
|
|
|
|
17,531
|
|
|
|
3,266
|
|
|
|
58,319
|
|
|
|
108,349
|
|
|
|
49,734
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Represents annual accounting cost
for Scorecard LTI granted in June 2011 for performance in fiscal
year 2011. The fair value of each award is adjusted for changes
in JHI SEs share price at each balance sheet date until
the Scorecard is applied at the conclusion of fiscal year 2012,
at which time the final value of the Scorecard LTI is based on
the companys share price and the senior executives
Scorecard rating at the time of vesting.
|
|
2 |
|
Represents annual accounting cost
for the Hybrid RSUs granted in June 2011 for performance in
fiscal year 2011. The fair value of each RSU is adjusted for
changes in JHI SEs share price at each balance sheet date
until the Scorecard is applied in June 2013.
|
|
3 |
|
Represents annual accounting cost
for the Relative TSR RSUs granted in September 2010 with fair
market value estimated using the Monte Carlo option-pricing
method.
|
|
|
4.
|
REMUNERATION
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2012
|
4.1 Overview
of Remuneration for Fiscal Year 2012
Following their review of the existing remuneration framework,
the Remuneration Committee and Board resolved to continue with
the remuneration framework of the last three years in fiscal
year 2012.
In particular, the Board and Remuneration Committee has
determined that the continuing challenging market conditions
mean that a transfer of 40% of senior executives LTI
target to STI is warranted in order to ensure appropriate
management focus on the companys short term results.
Subject to a number of adjustments described below, the STI and
LTI incentive plans and the amount of a senior executives
STI and LTI target allocated to those plans will continue in
fiscal year 2012.
4.2 Summary
of Changes to Compensation for Fiscal Year 2012
The principal changes to the companys compensation
programs in fiscal year 2012 are:
|
|
|
expanding the Zero-to-Landfill Scorecard objective
to a broader Manufacturing Efficiency Reset
objective;
|
|
|
indexing performance targets for the cash Executive Incentive
Plan Payout Matrix for changes in the US repair and remodel
market and pulp prices;
|
|
|
indexing performance targets for the Hybrid RSUs for changes in
pulp prices;
|
|
|
giving the Remuneration Committee broader flexibility to reward
senior executives under the IP Plan, subject to the existing cap
of 150% of target; and
|
|
|
increasing the CEOs target LTI by US$300,000 to
US$3,100,000.
|
The reasons for these changes are set out in further detail
below.
4.3 Details
of Variable Remuneration Components in
Fiscal Year 2012
4.3.1 Scorecard
The Board uses the Scorecard to set strategic objectives for
which performance can only be assessed over a period of time.
The company has made significant progress in each of the past
three years reducing the amount of materials sent to landfill.
In fiscal year 2012, the Zero-to-Landfill objective
will be expanded to a broader Manufacturing Efficiency
Reset objective which will be a multi-year initiative
building (and continuing) the waste reduction objectives of
Zero-to-Landfill but also focusing on increasing
machine efficiencies and product capabilities. Among other
matters, this will support more energy efficient manufacturing.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
51
|
4.3.2 FY2012
Short Term Incentive
For fiscal year 2012, the Board will continue to transfer 40% of
each senior executives LTI target to the STI target. This
component will be received in Hybrid RSUs based on the
companys performance in fiscal year 2012, which are then
subject to negative discretion exercisable by the Board under
the Scorecard in a further two years.
|
|
(a)
|
Individual
Performance Plan
|
20% of the STI target for senior executives (other than the CFO)
will continue to be allocated to the IP Plan, to be paid in
cash. There will be no change to the 150% maximum payout.
The existing IP Plan for senior executives has five levels of
performance rating, each resulting in the payment of a certain
percentage of the senior executives STI target (up to a
maximum of 150%). Whilst this rating system is effective and
will be retained for most employees, the Board believes that a
more flexible system is appropriate for senior executives. For
fiscal year 2012, senior executives will still be assessed by
the Board and Remuneration Committee on their individual
performance against specific objectives, but the final amount
payable under the IP Plan will be a discretionary payment
determined by the Board and Remuneration Committee.
No other changes in the operation of the IP Plan are planned for
fiscal year 2012.
|
|
(b)
|
Executive
Incentive Plan Cash
|
80% of the STI target for senior executives (other than the
CFO) will continue to be allocated to the Executive Incentive
Plan. The maximum payout is 300% of target.
The existing Payout Matrix will continue to be used
in fiscal year 2012, although the matrix will incorporate
indexing for changes in new housing starts, the US repair and
remodel market and pulp prices. Other factors such as legacy
costs and exchange rate movements will also be excluded.
The Board has approved a Payout Matrix for each business unit.
Each Payout Matrix includes a range of Return Measure and Growth
Measure targets. The actual amount earned will be determined by
the actual earnings and sales growth results for each business
unit, and the corporate result will be based on the combined
results of all of the business units. Strong returns on one
measure at the expense of the other measure may result in lower,
or nil, reward.
All senior executives, including the CEO, will have a goal based
on the corporate result.
The Board will have discretion to change the payout under the
Payout Matrix if growth relative to market is below expectations
and the Board determines that the reason for such performance is
outside managements control or as a result of a management
decision endorsed by the Board given an assessment of market
circumstances at the time.
No other changes in the operation of the Executive Incentive
Plan are planned for fiscal year 2012.
The Board believes that the Executive Incentive Program and
Payout Matrix are appropriate for the reasons set out in
sections 2.4 and 3.3.1(b) of this Remuneration report.
|
|
(c)
|
LTI Transferred
to STI Hybrid RSUs
|
The company intends to continue to transfer 40% of LTI target
for senior executives to an STI target, with an award based on
fiscal year 2012 performance payable in two-year deferred Hybrid
RSUs subject to the Scorecard, and vesting and converting to
shares in June 2014. The maximum payout will remain at 300% of
target.
The retention of the 40% transfer of target LTI to STI reflects
the Boards continued concerns about the lack of stability
in the US housing market as well as emphasising continued
profitability as the company seeks to attain its primary demand
growth objectives. The EBIT performance targets for the Hybrid
RSUs are based on historical results. Achievement of a target
payout in Hybrid RSUs will require improvement on the average
performance for fiscal years 2009 to 2011, indexed to housing
starts and pulp prices.
The Hybrid RSUs will then be subject to negative discretion of
the Board based on the Scorecard in June 2014 (ie the number of
Hybrid RSUs which are to vest and convert to shares may be
reduced, depending on the rating received under the Scorecard).
The Scorecard for the Hybrid RSUs will be the same as in fiscal
year 2011, except that the Zero-to-Landfill
objective will be expanded to a broader Manufacturing
Efficiency Reset objective.
All senior executives, including the CEO, will have the same
corporate level EBIT goal. The EBIT achievement will have
the following potential payout slope:
Before the Hybrid RSUs vest and convert to shares, the Board
will assess each senior executives contribution to the
long-term objectives set out in the Scorecard and provide each
of them with a rating of between 0 and 100. Depending on this
rating, between 0% and 100% of the senior executives
Hybrid RSUs will vest. In effect, the Scorecard applies a
holdback and forfeiture principle to ensure
short-term results in fiscal year 2012 are not obtained at the
expense of long-term sustainability.
All other elements of the Hybrid RSUs in fiscal year 2012 will
be the same as in fiscal year 2011.
|
|
52
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
Calculation of the Hybrid RSUs in June 2012 and June 2014 is
described below:
|
|
|
1 |
|
Amount of LTI target received as
Hybrid RSUs in the absence of long-term quantitative financial
measures
|
The Board believes that the Hybrid RSUs are appropriate for the
reasons set out in section 3.3.1(c) of this Remuneration
report.
4.3.2 Long-Term
Incentive
In previous remuneration reports the Board has stated that the
CEOs LTI target remains below target levels compared to US
peers and that further adjustments will be required to bring the
LTI target in line with the Boards policy. For fiscal year
2012, the CEOs LTI target will increase by $300,000 to
$3,100,000.
It is currently intended that there will be no changes in the
operation of Relative TSR RSUs or in the peer group of companies
for fiscal year 2012.
The Board considered whether re-testing continued to be
appropriate for Relative TSR RSUs, and determined that it is,
given short-term price fluctuations in the price of the
companys shares.
The maximum that can be received will remain at 300% of the LTI
target allocated to Relative TSR RSUs.
Other than replacing the Zero-to-Landfill objective
with the Manufacturing Efficiency Reset objective,
it is currently intended that there will be no changes to the
operation of Scorecard LTI for fiscal year 2012.
The maximum that can be received will remain at 300% of the LTI
target allocated to Scorecard LTI.
Further details of the Relative TSR RSUs and Hybrid RSUs for
fiscal year 2012 will be set out in the 2011 AGM Notice of
Meeting.
4.4 Fixed
Remuneration
No significant changes to Fixed Remuneration are planned for
fiscal year 2012.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
53
|
|
|
5.
|
REMUNERATION
TABLES FOR SENIOR EXECUTIVES
|
5.1 Total
Remuneration for Senior Executives for the Years Ended
31 March 2011 and 31 March 2010
Details of the remuneration of the senior executives in fiscal
year 2011 and 2010 are set out below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(US dollars)
|
|
Primary
|
|
|
Post-employment
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Relocation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowances,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expatriate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Superannuation
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncash
|
|
|
and 401(k)
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
and Other
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Base Pay
|
|
|
Bonuses1
|
|
|
Benefits2
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
Awards3
|
|
|
Non-recurring
|
|
|
Total
|
|
L. Gries
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
$
|
944,137
|
|
|
$
|
948,342
|
|
|
$
|
50,948
|
|
|
$
|
17,072
|
|
|
$
|
5,075,476
|
|
|
$
|
599,806
|
4
|
|
$
|
7,635,781
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
936,860
|
|
|
|
1,688,832
|
|
|
|
471,208
|
|
|
|
12,999
|
|
|
|
3,744,250
|
|
|
|
174,510
|
|
|
|
7,028,659
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Chenu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
828,334
|
5
|
|
|
255,494
|
|
|
|
85,570
|
|
|
|
78,812
|
|
|
|
867,564
|
|
|
|
132,740
|
|
|
|
2,248,514
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
738,463
|
|
|
|
320,148
|
|
|
|
83,728
|
|
|
|
66,462
|
|
|
|
607,122
|
|
|
|
185,971
|
|
|
|
2,001,894
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R.
Cox6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
436,206
|
|
|
|
397,801
|
|
|
|
33,613
|
|
|
|
19,037
|
|
|
|
1,224,965
|
|
|
|
38,143
|
|
|
|
2,149,765
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
450,000
|
|
|
|
245,699
|
|
|
|
74,721
|
|
|
|
14,700
|
|
|
|
606,351
|
|
|
|
156,807
|
|
|
|
1,548,278
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Fisher
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
438,596
|
|
|
|
200,803
|
|
|
|
28,401
|
|
|
|
15,986
|
|
|
|
755,725
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,439,511
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
384,169
|
|
|
|
382,303
|
|
|
|
33,098
|
|
|
|
12,842
|
|
|
|
536,472
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,348,884
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Rigby
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
472,663
|
|
|
|
204,204
|
|
|
|
24,413
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
765,132
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,466,412
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
397,558
|
|
|
|
406,711
|
|
|
|
24,228
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
536,472
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,364,969
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Compensation for Senior Executives
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
3,119,936
|
|
|
|
2,006,644
|
|
|
|
222,945
|
|
|
|
130,907
|
|
|
|
8,688,862
|
|
|
|
770,689
|
|
|
|
14,939,983
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
2,907,050
|
|
|
|
3,043,693
|
|
|
|
686,983
|
|
|
|
107,003
|
|
|
|
6,030,667
|
|
|
|
517,288
|
|
|
|
13,292,684
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Bonuses in respect of each fiscal
year are paid in June of the following fiscal year. The amounts
in fiscal years 2011 and 2010 include all incentive amounts
accrued in respect of each fiscal year, pursuant to the terms of
the applicable plans and any additional one-off discretionary
bonuses paid. In addition, since the amount reported each year
is an estimated accrual, fiscal year 2010s bonus amounts
include any adjustments to the 2009 bonus amounts previously
reported to the extent necessary to reflect the actual bonus
paid. Senior executives were paid fiscal year 2010 bonuses in
performance shares. Refer to section 3 of this remuneration
report for a summary of the terms of our Variable Remuneration
plans.
|
|
2 |
|
Includes the aggregate amount of
all noncash benefits received by the executive in the year
indicated. Examples of noncash benefits that may be received by
executives include medical and life insurance benefits, car
allowances, membership in executive wellness programs, long
service leave, and tax services.
|
|
3 |
|
Includes grants of Scorecard LTI
awards, Relative TSR and Hybrid RSUs. Relative TSR RSUs are
valued using the Monte Carlo simulation method. Hybrid RSUs and
Scorecard LTI awards are valued based on JHI SEs share
price at each balance date. The fair value of equity awards
granted are included in compensation during the period in which
the equity awards vest.
|
|
4 |
|
Includes a one-off non-cash charge
to recognise gross up and tax paid on fiscal year 2010s
bonus during secondment to The Netherlands.
|
|
5 |
|
R Chenus base salary is paid
in A$ and a significant amount of this increase is as a result
of changes in the A$:US$ exchange rate.
|
|
6 |
|
A number of R Coxs RSUs and
Scorecard LTI were forfeited during fiscal year 2011. Under US
GAAP accounting standards the company was required to record a
non-cash cost in relation to the forfeiture.
|
|
|
54
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
5.2 Equity
Holdings for the Years Ended 31 March 2011 and
2010
(a) Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
Holding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
Holding
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Price
|
|
|
|
at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lapse
|
|
|
|
at
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
per right
|
|
|
|
1 April
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per right2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
per right3
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Name
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
|
(A$)
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
(US$)
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
(US$)
|
|
|
|
Lapsed
|
|
|
|
(US$)
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
per right4
|
|
Senior Executives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
|
3-Dec-026
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.4490
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
210,633
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.6481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5-Dec-035
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.0500
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
338,975
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
325,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.0430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-Nov-056
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.5300
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,152,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,000,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-Nov-067
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.4000
|
|
|
|
|
415,000
|
|
|
|
|
415,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
888,100
|
|
|
|
|
415,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
415,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-Nov-067
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.4000
|
|
|
|
|
381,000
|
|
|
|
|
381,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,131,570
|
|
|
|
|
381,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
381,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.9700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-077
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.8300
|
|
|
|
|
445,000
|
|
|
|
|
445,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
965,650
|
|
|
|
|
445,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
445,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-077
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.8300
|
|
|
|
|
437,000
|
|
|
|
|
437,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,302,260
|
|
|
|
|
437,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
437,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.9800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
|
22-Feb-055
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.3000
|
|
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
107,973
|
|
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.1610
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22-Nov-056
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.5300
|
|
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
193,725
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1525
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-Nov-067
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.4000
|
|
|
|
|
65,000
|
|
|
|
|
65,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
139,100
|
|
|
|
|
65,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1400
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-Nov-067
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.4000
|
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
178,200
|
|
|
|
|
36,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.9700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-077
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.8300
|
|
|
|
|
68,000
|
|
|
|
|
68,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
130,200
|
|
|
|
|
68,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.1700
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
29-Aug-077
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.8300
|
|
|
|
|
66,000
|
|
|
|
|
66,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
178,800
|
|
|
|
|
36,960
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
66,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.9800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Cox
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
|
17-Dec-01
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0586
|
|
|
|
|
68,283
|
|
|
|
|
68,283
|
|
|
|
$
|
28,904
|
|
|
|
|
68,283
|
|
|
|
|
68,283
|
|
|
|
|
1.7114
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.4233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-Dec-02
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.4490
|
|
|
|
|
74,000
|
|
|
|
|
74,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
47,959
|
|
|
|
|
74,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
74,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.6481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5-Dec-03
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.0500
|
|
|
|
|
132,000
|
|
|
|
|
132,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
137,676
|
|
|
|
|
132,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
132,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.0430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-Dec-04
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9900
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
183,276
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.0182
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-Dec-05
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.9000
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
386,137
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.0323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-Nov-06
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.4000
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
$
|
291,069
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.8364
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-Dec-07
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.3800
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
$
|
275,064
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.9903
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
|
17-Dec-01
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0586
|
|
|
|
|
20,003
|
|
|
|
|
20,003
|
|
|
|
$
|
8,467
|
|
|
|
|
20,003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,003
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.4233
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3-Dec-02
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.4490
|
|
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
17,499
|
|
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.6481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5-Dec-03
|
|
|
|
$
|
7.0500
|
|
|
|
|
33,000
|
|
|
|
|
33,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
34,419
|
|
|
|
|
33,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.0430
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-Dec-04
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9900
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
183,276
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
180,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.0182
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1-Dec-05
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.9000
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
386,137
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
190,000
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.0323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21-Nov-06
|
|
|
|
$
|
8.4000
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
$
|
291,069
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
158,500
|
|
|
|
$
|
1.8364
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-Dec-07
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.3800
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
$
|
275,084
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
277,778
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.9903
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
55
|
(b) RSUs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holding
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holding
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Value at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
at
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
1 April
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Name
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
(US$)
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
|
Lapsed
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
per unit
|
|
Senior Executives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
15-Sep-088
|
|
|
|
201,324
|
|
|
|
|
201,324
|
|
|
|
$
|
746,107
|
|
|
|
|
201,324
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.7060
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-089
|
|
|
|
558,708
|
|
|
|
|
558,708
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,592,318
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
558,708
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.8500
|
|
|
|
|
29-May-09
|
|
|
|
487,446
|
|
|
|
|
487,446
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,100,892
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
487,446
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.3650
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-099
|
|
|
|
234,900
|
|
|
|
|
234,900
|
|
|
|
$
|
1,653,696
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
234,900
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0100
|
|
|
|
|
11-Dec-099
|
|
|
|
81,746
|
|
|
|
|
81,746
|
|
|
|
$
|
670,317
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,746
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.9100
|
|
|
|
|
07-Jun-1011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
360,267
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,604,730
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
360,267
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9477
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
577,255
|
|
|
|
$
|
3,428,895
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
577,255
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.4965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
15-Sep-089
|
|
|
|
108,637
|
|
|
|
|
108,637
|
|
|
|
$
|
309,615
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
108,637
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.8500
|
|
|
|
|
29-May-09
|
|
|
|
94,781
|
|
|
|
|
94,781
|
|
|
|
$
|
408,506
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
94,781
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.3650
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-099
|
|
|
|
45,675
|
|
|
|
|
45,675
|
|
|
|
$
|
321,552
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
45,675
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0100
|
|
|
|
|
11-Dec-099
|
|
|
|
15,895
|
|
|
|
|
15,895
|
|
|
|
$
|
130,339
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,895
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.9100
|
|
|
|
|
07-Jun-1011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,052
|
|
|
|
$
|
506,476
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
70,052
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9477
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,157
|
|
|
|
$
|
428,613
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,157
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.4965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Cox
|
|
|
15-Sep-089
|
|
|
|
155,196
|
|
|
|
|
155,196
|
|
|
|
$
|
442,309
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
62,504
|
|
|
|
|
92,692
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.8500
|
|
|
|
|
29-May-09
|
|
|
|
135,402
|
|
|
|
|
135,402
|
|
|
|
$
|
583,583
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
61,580
|
|
|
|
|
73,822
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.3650
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-099
|
|
|
|
65,250
|
|
|
|
|
65,250
|
|
|
|
$
|
459,360
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
65,250
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0100
|
|
|
|
|
11-Dec-099
|
|
|
|
22,707
|
|
|
|
|
22,707
|
|
|
|
$
|
186,197
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,707
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.9100
|
|
|
|
|
07-Jun-1011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100,074
|
|
|
|
$
|
723,535
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
96,788
|
|
|
|
|
3,286
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
17-Jun-0810
|
|
|
|
36,066
|
|
|
|
|
36,066
|
|
|
|
$
|
144,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,066
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.0100
|
|
|
|
|
17-Dec-089
|
|
|
|
116,948
|
|
|
|
|
116,948
|
|
|
|
$
|
268,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,948
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.3000
|
|
|
|
|
29-May-09
|
|
|
|
77,548
|
|
|
|
|
77,548
|
|
|
|
$
|
334,232
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,548
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.3650
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-099
|
|
|
|
39,150
|
|
|
|
|
39,150
|
|
|
|
$
|
275,616
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,150
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0100
|
|
|
|
|
11-Dec-099
|
|
|
|
13,624
|
|
|
|
|
13,624
|
|
|
|
$
|
111,717
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,624
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.9100
|
|
|
|
|
07-Jun-1011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,044
|
|
|
|
$
|
434,118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,044
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9477
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,003
|
|
|
|
$
|
397,998
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,003
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.4965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
17-Jun-0810
|
|
|
|
36,066
|
|
|
|
|
36,066
|
|
|
|
$
|
44,625
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
36,066
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.0100
|
|
|
|
|
17-Dec-089
|
|
|
|
116,948
|
|
|
|
|
116,948
|
|
|
|
$
|
268,980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
116,948
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.3000
|
|
|
|
|
29-May-09
|
|
|
|
77,548
|
|
|
|
|
77,548
|
|
|
|
$
|
334,232
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,548
|
|
|
|
$
|
3.3650
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-099
|
|
|
|
39,150
|
|
|
|
|
39,150
|
|
|
|
$
|
275,616
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,150
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.0100
|
|
|
|
|
11-Dec-099
|
|
|
|
13,624
|
|
|
|
|
13,624
|
|
|
|
$
|
111,716
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,624
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.9100
|
|
|
|
|
07-Jun-1011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,044
|
|
|
|
$
|
434,118
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60,044
|
|
|
|
$
|
5.9477
|
|
|
|
|
15-Sep-109
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,157
|
|
|
|
$
|
428,613
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,157
|
|
|
|
$
|
4.4965
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Total Value at Grant = Weighted
Average Fair Value per right multiplied by number of rights
granted.
|
|
2 |
|
Value at Exercise/right = Value
Market Value of a share of the companys stock at Exercise
less the Exercise price per right.
|
|
3 |
|
Value at Lapse/right = Fair Market
Value of a share of the companys stock at Lapse less the
Exercise price per right.
|
|
4 |
|
Weighted Average Fair Value per
right is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes
option-pricing model or Monte Carlo option pricing method,
depending on the plan the options were issued under.
|
|
5 |
|
Options granted under 2001 JHI SE
Equity Incentive Plan. See section 7, page 58 for
summary of key terms of options granted.
|
|
6 |
|
Options granted under 2005 Managing
Board Transitional Stock Option Plan. See section 7,
page 60 for summary of key terms of options granted.
|
|
7 |
|
Options granted under James Hardie
Industries Long-Term Incentive Plan 2006 (LTIP). See
section 7, pages 59-60 for summary of key terms of options
granted.
|
|
8 |
|
Deferred Bonus RSUs granted under
Deferred Bonus Program and LTIP. See section 7,
page 61 for key terms of Deferred Bonus RSUs.
|
|
9 |
|
Relative TSR RSUs granted under
LTIP. See section 7, page 59 for key terms of Relative
TSR RSUs.
|
|
10 |
|
Deferred Bonus RSUs granted under
Deferred Bonus Program and 2001 JHI SE Equity Incentive Plan.
|
|
11 |
|
Hybrid RSUs (formerly Executive
Incentive Plan RSUs) granted under LTIP. See Section 7,
Page 60 for key terms of Hybrid RSUs.
|
|
|
56
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
(c) Scorecard LTI
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant
|
|
|
Holding at
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Holding at
|
|
Name
|
|
|
Date
|
|
|
1 April 2010
|
|
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
Vested
|
|
|
|
Lapsed
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011
|
|
Senior Executives
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
21-Jun-09
|
|
|
|
483,294
|
|
|
|
|
483,294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
483,294
|
|
|
|
|
29-Jun-10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
442,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
442,424
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
21-Jun-09
|
|
|
|
93,974
|
|
|
|
|
93,974
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,974
|
|
|
|
|
29-Jun-10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Robert Cox
|
|
|
21-Jun-09
|
|
|
|
134,248
|
|
|
|
|
134,248
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88,315
|
|
|
|
|
45,933
|
|
|
|
|
29-Jun-10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
21-Jun-09
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
|
|
|
29-Jun-10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
51,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
21-Jun-09
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
80,549
|
|
|
|
|
29-Jun-10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,303
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.3 Senior
Executives Relevant Interests in JHISE
Changes in senior executives relevant interests in JHI SE
securities between 1 April 2010 and 31 March 2011 are
set out below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CUFS at
|
|
|
|
CUFS at
|
|
|
|
Options at
|
|
|
|
Options at
|
|
|
|
RSUs at
|
|
|
|
RSUs at
|
|
|
|
|
1 April 2010
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011
|
|
|
|
1 April 2010
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011
|
|
|
|
1 April 2010
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011
|
|
Louis Gries
|
|
|
|
259,875
|
|
|
|
|
298,543
|
|
|
|
|
3,328,000
|
|
|
|
|
2,328,000
|
|
|
|
|
1,564,124
|
|
|
|
|
2,300,322
|
|
Russell Chenu
|
|
|
|
35,000
|
|
|
|
|
55,990
|
|
|
|
|
442,000
|
|
|
|
|
352,000
|
|
|
|
|
264,988
|
|
|
|
|
407,197
|
|
Robert Cox
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48,621
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
378,555
|
|
|
|
|
169,800
|
|
Mark Fisher
|
|
|
|
29,519
|
|
|
|
|
96,519
|
|
|
|
|
1,080,561
|
|
|
|
|
1,012,278
|
|
|
|
|
283,336
|
|
|
|
|
410,383
|
|
Nigel Rigby
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
73,792
|
|
|
|
|
886,281
|
|
|
|
|
886,281
|
|
|
|
|
283,336
|
|
|
|
|
415,537
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5.4 Stock
Ownership Guidelines
The Remuneration Committee believes that senior executives
should hold James Hardie stock to further align their interests
with those of the companys shareholders. The company has
adopted stock ownership guidelines for senior executives which
require them to accumulate the following holdings in the company
over a period of five years from 1 April 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
Multiple of
|
Position
|
|
base salary
|
Chief Executive Officer
|
|
3x
|
Chief Financial Officer and General Counsel
|
|
1.5x
|
Other senior executives
|
|
1x
|
|
|
|
Until the guideline has been achieved, a senior executive is
required to retain at least 75% of shares obtained under the
companys long-term equity incentive plans, by exercising
of options or vesting of the RSUs (net of taxes and other costs).
The CEO and two other senior executives held the number of
shares required to comply with the stock ownership guidelines
during fiscal year 2011. However, even after the stock ownership
guidelines have been achieved, senior executives are required to
retain at least 25% of shares issued under the companys
long-term equity incentive plans as a result of exercise of
options or vesting of RSUs (net of taxes and other costs).
Details of the companys policy regarding employees hedging
James Hardie shares or grants under various equity incentive
plans are set out on page 68 of the Corporate Governance
Report within this annual report.
5.5 Loans
The company did not grant loans to senior executives during
fiscal year 2011. There are no loans outstanding to senior
executives.
|
|
57
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
Remuneration and other terms of employment for the CEO, CFO and
General Counsel and certain other senior executives are
formalised in employment contracts. The main elements of these
contracts are set out below.
6.1 CEOs
Employment Contract
Details of the terms of the CEOs employment contract are
as follows:
|
|
|
Components
|
|
Details
|
Length of contract
|
|
Indefinite. The CEO is an at-will employee.
|
|
|
|
Base salary
|
|
US$950,000 for fiscal year 2011 and 2012. Salary reviewed
annually by the Board and there will be no base salary increase
for fiscal year 2012.
|
|
|
|
Short-term incentive
|
|
Annual STI target is 125% of annual base salary for fiscal year
2011 and 2012. The quantum of STI target is reviewed annually
by the Board in May.
|
|
|
The Remuneration Committee recommends the companys and
CEOs performance objectives, and the performance against
these objectives, to the Board for approval. The CEOs
short-term incentive is calculated under the Executive Incentive
Plan and the IP Plan.
|
|
|
|
Long-term incentive
|
|
On the approval of shareholders, stock options or other equity
incentive will be granted each year. The recommended number of
options or other form of equity to be granted will be
appropriate for this level of executive in the US. For fiscal
year 2012, the LTI target will be US$3.1 million.
|
|
|
|
Defined Contribution Plan
|
|
The CEO may participate in the US 401(k) defined contribution
plan up to the annual US Internal Revenue Service (IRS) limit.
The company will match the CEOs contributions into the
plan up to the annual IRS limit.
|
|
|
|
Resignation
|
|
The CEO may cease employment with the company by providing
written notice. If the CEO retires with the approval of the
Board then his unvested RSUs and awards will not be forfeited
and will be held until the next test date.
|
|
|
|
Termination by James Hardie
|
|
The company may terminate the CEOs employment for cause or
not for cause. If the company terminates the CEOs
employment, not for cause, or the CEO terminates his employment
for good reason the company will pay the following:
|
|
|
(a) amount equivalent to 1.5 times the CEOs annual base
salary at the time of termination; and
|
|
|
(b) amount equivalent to 1.5 times the CEOs average STI
actually paid in up to the previous three fiscal years as CEO;
and
|
|
|
(c) continuation of health and medical benefits at the
companys expense for the duration of the consulting
agreement referenced below; and
|
|
|
|
Post-termination Consulting
|
|
The company will request the CEO, and the CEO will agree, to
consult to the company upon termination for a minimum of two
years, as long as the CEO maintains the Companys
non-compete and confidentiality agreements and executes a
release of claims following the effective date of termination.
Under the consulting agreement, the CEO will receive the annual
base salary and annual target incentive in exchange for this
consulting and non-compete. Under the terms of equity incentive
grants made to the CEO under the LTIP, the CEOs
outstanding options will not expire during any post-termination
consulting period. In addition, in the event of an agreed
separation or agreed retirement, his unvested restricted stock
units and awards will not be automatically forfeited. This
arrangement is a standard arrangement for US executives and the
Board considers that it is an appropriate restraint for Mr Gries
given his intimate involvement in developing the companys
fibre cement business in the United States over the past
20 years.
|
|
|
|
6.2 CFOs
Employment Contract
Details of the CFOs employment contract are as follows:
|
|
|
Components
|
|
Details
|
Length of contract
|
|
Fixed period concluding 5 October 2012.
|
|
|
|
Base salary
|
|
A$900,279 for fiscal year 2011. Salary reviewed annually by the
Board in May.
|
|
|
|
Short-term incentive
|
|
Annual STI target is 33% of annual base salary as set out in the
CFOs employment contract, based on personal goals. The CFO
does not participate in the Executive Incentive Program for his
short-term incentive.
|
|
|
|
Long-term incentive
|
|
The CFO will receive stock options or other long-term equity
with performance hurdles each year. The value of equity to be
granted will be equivalent to at least US$350,000.
|
|
|
|
Superannuation
|
|
The CFO is entitled to superannuation contributions equal to 9%
of his base salary. The contribution to the CFOs
superannuation fund will be the maximum contribution currently
allowed by law (A$50,000), with the balance paid to the CFO.
|
|
|
|
Resignation or Termination
|
|
The company or CFO may cease the CFOs employment with the
company by providing three months notice in writing.
|
|
|
|
Redundancy or diminution of role
|
|
If the position of CFO is determined to be redundant or subject
to a material diminution in status, duties or responsibility,
the company or the CFO may terminate the CFOs employment.
The company will pay the CFO a severance payment equal to the
greater of 12 months pay or the remaining proportion
of the term of the contract.
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
6.3 Benefits
contained in contracts for CEO, CFO and General
Counsel
In fiscal year 2011, and until we moved our corporate domicile
to Ireland, the CEO, CFO and General Counsel were on
international assignment in The Netherlands. During the time of
their international assignment, the employment contracts for the
CEO, CFO and General Counsel also specified the benefits listed
below. The CFO continues to receive these benefits during the
term of his assignment in the US:
|
|
|
|
|
|
International Assignment
|
|
Additional benefits due to international assignment: housing
allowance, expatriate Goods and Services allowance, moving and
storage.
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Tax Equalisation: The company covers the extra personal
tax burden imposed by residency in The Netherlands.
|
|
|
Tax Advice: The company will pay the costs of filing
income tax returns in The Netherlands.
|
|
|
Health, Welfare and Vacation Benefits: Eligible to
receive all health, welfare and vacation benefits offered to all
US employees, or similar benefits. The CEO was also eligible to
participate in the companys Executive Health and Wellness
program.
|
|
|
Business Expenses: Entitled to receive reimbursement for
all reasonable and necessary travel and other business expenses
incurred or paid for in connection with the performance of their
services under their employment agreements.
|
|
|
Automobile: The company will either purchase or lease an
automobile for business and personal use, or, in the
alternative, they will be entitled to an automobile equivalent
to the level of vehicle they could receive in the US.
|
|
|
|
6.4 Other
senior executives employment contracts
Details of employment contracts for senior executives are as
follows:
|
|
|
Components
|
|
Details
|
Length of contract
|
|
Indefinite.
|
|
|
|
Base salary
|
|
Base salary is subject to Remuneration Committee approval and
reviewed annually in May.
|
|
|
|
Short-term incentive
|
|
An annual STI target is set at a percentage of the senior
executives salary. The STI target is between 60% and 65%
and reviewed annually.
|
|
|
|
Long-term incentive
|
|
Upon the approval of the Board, awards of Scorecard LTI awards
and grants of Relative TSR and Hybrid RSUs may be made under the
LTIP plan.
|
|
|
|
Defined Contribution Plan
|
|
US senior executives may participate in the US 401(k) defined
contribution plan up to the annual IRS limit. The company will
match the senior executives contributions into the plan up
to the annual IRS limit.
|
|
|
|
Resignation
|
|
The senior executive may cease employment with the company by
providing 30 days written notice.
|
|
|
|
Termination by James Hardie
|
|
The company may terminate the senior executives employment
for cause or not for cause. Other than the post-termination
consulting arrangement discussed below for a termination without
cause or a resignation for good reason, no other termination
payments are payable, except as required under the terms of the
applicable STI or LTI plans.
|
|
|
|
Post-termination Consulting
|
|
Depending on the senior executives individual contract,
and the reasons for termination, the company may request the
senior executive, and the senior executive will agree, to
consult to the company for two years upon termination, as long
as they sign and comply with 1) a consulting agreement, which
will require them to maintain non-compete and confidentiality
obligations to the company, and 2) a release of claims in a form
acceptable to the company. In exchange for the consulting
agreement, the company shall pay the senior executives
annual base salary as of the termination date for each year of
consulting.
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
Health, Welfare and Vacation Benefits: Eligible to
receive all health, welfare and vacation benefits offered to all
US employees and also eligible to participate in the
companys Executive Health and Wellness program.
|
|
|
Business Expenses: The senior executives are entitled to
receive reimbursement for all reasonable and necessary travel
and other business expenses incurred or paid in connection with
the performance of services under their employment.
|
|
|
Automobile: The company will either lease an automobile
for business and personal use by the senior executive, or, in
the alternative, the executive will be entitled to an automobile
lease allowance not to exceed US$750 per month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.
|
KEY
TERMS OF EQUITY GRANTS
|
7.1 Outstanding
Equity Grants
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001 JHI SE Equity Incentive Plan (Options)
|
|
Annual option grants made in December 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and
2005, November 2007 and December 2007.
Off-cycle
grants made to new employees in March 2007.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
General management, not Managing Board
directors1
(all awards were granted while JHI SE was domiciled in The
Netherlands).
|
|
|
|
Vesting schedule
|
|
25% of options vest on the 1st anniversary of the grant, 25%
vest on the 2nd anniversary date and 50% vest on the 3rd
anniversary date.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
10th anniversary of each grant.
|
|
|
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
59
|
|
|
|
2001 JHI SE Equity Incentive Plan (RSUs)
|
|
Annual grants made in December 2008, 2009 and 2010. RSUs
replaced options as the companys grant vehicle in 2008.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Senior employees other than senior executives.
|
|
|
|
Vesting schedule
|
|
25% of RSUs vest on the 1st anniversary of the grant, 25% vest
on the 2nd anniversary date and 50% vest on the 3rd anniversary
date.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
RSUs convert to shares on vesting on a one-for-one basis.
|
|
|
|
James Hardie Industries Long Term Incentive Plan 2006 (LTIP)
Option Grants
|
|
Options granted on 21 November 2006 and 29 August
2007. Grants were divided into two tranches: Return on Capital
Employed (which we refer to as ROCE) and TSR.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Managing Board directors.
|
|
|
|
Performance period
|
|
Three years to five years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
Retesting
|
|
Yes, for the TSR tranche only, on the last Business Day of each
six-month period following the
3rd
Anniversary and before the 5th Anniversary.
|
|
|
|
Exercise period
|
|
Until ten years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
Performance condition
|
|
For the ROCE tranche:
|
|
|
ROCE performance against the following global peer group of
building materials companies in US, Europe and Australia
specialising in building materials: Boral Limited, Valspar
Corporation, Hanson plc, Rinker Group Limited (2006 grant only),
Weyerhaeuser, Lafarge SA, CSR Limited, Cemex SA de CV, Nichiha
Corp, Fletcher Building Limited, Martin Marietta Materials Inc,
Saint Gobain, Eagle Materials Inc, Texas Industries,
Wienerberger AG, Lousiana-Pacific Corporation, Florida Rock
Industries Inc, CRH plc, USG Corporation, Vulcan Materials Co
and The Siam Cement Plc.
|
|
|
For the TSR tranche:
|
|
|
|
|
|
TSR performance against a peer group of comparable companies in
the S&P/ASX 100 at the time of grant excluding financial
institutions, insurance companies, property trusts, oil and gas
producers and mining companies, and adjusted to account for
additions and deletions to S&P/ASX 100 during the relevant
period.
|
|
|
|
Vesting criteria
|
|
For the ROCE tranche:
|
|
|
|
|
|
− 0% vesting if ROCE below 60th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
− 50% vesting if ROCE at 60th percentile of peer
group.
|
|
|
− Between the 60th and 85th percentiles,
vesting on a straight line basis.
|
|
|
− 100% vesting if ROCE is at 85th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
For the TSR tranche:
|
|
|
|
|
|
− 0% vesting if TSR below 50th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
− 50% vesting if TSR at 50th percentile of peer
group.
|
|
|
− Between 50th and 75th percentiles,
vesting on a straight line basis.
|
|
|
− 100% vesting if TSR is at 75th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
|
Vesting to date
|
|
To date, the 2006 and 2007 grant ROCE tranche options vested
100%, the 2006 TSR tranche options have vested 60% and the 2007
TSR tranche options have vested 56%. No options have been
exercised.
|
|
|
|
James Hardie Industries Long Term Incentive Plan 2006
(Relative TSR RSUs) (RSUs)
|
|
Relative TSR RSUs granted September and December 2008 and 2009
and September 2010.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Senior executives and Managing Board directors (1).
|
|
|
|
Performance period
|
|
Three years to five years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
Retesting
|
|
Yes, on the last Business Day of each six month period following
three years from grant date and before five years from grant
date.
|
|
|
|
Exercise period
|
|
Until five years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
1 The
Managing Board was dissolved on 17 June 2011 following
completion of JHISEs re-domicile to Ireland.
|
|
|
|
|
|
60
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
|
|
|
Performance condition
|
|
TSR performance hurdle compared to the following peer group of
companies: Acuity Brands, Inc., Eagle Materials, Inc,
Headwaters, Inc, Lennox International, Inc, Louisiana-Pacific
Corp., Martin Marietta Materials, Inc, Masco Corporation, MDU
Resources Group, Inc, Mueller Water Products, Inc, NCI Building
Systems, Inc, Owens Corning, Quanex Building Products Corp.,
Sherwin Williams, Simpson Manufacturing Co., Texas Industries,
Inc, Trex, USG, Valmont Industries, Valspar Corporation, Vulcan
Materials and Watsco, Inc. For 2010 onwards, the TSR performance
hurdle peer group companies also include American Woodmark Corp,
Apogee Enterprises, Inc, Amstrong World Enterprises, Inc,
Fortune Brands, Inc, Interface, Inc, Mohawk Industries, Inc and
PGT Inc.
|
|
|
|
Vesting criteria
|
|
|
|
|
− 0% vesting if TSR below 50th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
− 33% vesting if TSR at 50th percentile of peer
group.
|
|
|
− Between 50th and 75th percentile, vesting
is on a straight line basis.
|
|
|
− 100% vesting if TSR is at 75th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
|
RSU exercise price
|
|
Not applicable.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
RSUs convert to shares on vesting on a one-for-one basis.
|
|
|
|
James Hardie Industries Long Term Incentive Plan 2006 (Hybrid
RSUs) (Previously referred to as Executive Incentive RSUs)
|
|
Hybrid RSUs granted June 2010 and 2011.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Senior executives and Managing Board directors.
|
|
|
|
Option Exercise Price
|
|
Nil.
|
|
|
|
Vesting schedule (2010 grant only)
|
|
A proportion will vest on the 2nd anniversary of the grant
depending on each senior executives Scorecard rating
between 0 and 100.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
RSUs convert to shares on vesting on a one-for-one basis.
|
|
|
|
James Hardie Industries Long Term Incentive Plan 2006
Scorecard LTI (Cash Awards)
|
|
Cash-settled Awards granted June 2009, 2010 and 2011
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Senior executives.
|
|
|
|
Option Exercise Price
|
|
Nil.
|
|
|
|
Performance period
|
|
Three years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
Payment schedule
|
|
A cash payment based on the companys share price at the
end of the performance period multiplied by the number of shares
that could have been acquired at the start of the performance
period and the senior executives Scorecard rating.
|
|
|
A proportion of the payment will be payable on the
3rd
anniversary of the grant depending on each senior
executives Scorecard rating between 0 and 100.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
Three years from the grant date.
|
|
|
|
7.2 Equity
grants which vested or lapsed in fiscal year 2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 Managing Board Transitional Stock Option Plan (MBTSOP)
(Options)
|
|
Options granted on 22 November 2005.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Managing Board directors.
|
|
|
|
Performance period
|
|
22 November 2005 to 22 November 2008.
|
|
|
|
Retesting
|
|
Yes, on the last Business Day of each six-month period following
the 3rd
anniversary and before the 5th anniversary.
|
|
|
|
Exercise period
|
|
Not applicable, as all options have lapsed.
|
|
|
|
Performance condition Vesting criteria
|
|
TSR compared to a peer group of companies in the S&P/ASX
200 Index on the grant date excluding the companies in the 200
Financials and 200 A-REIT GICS sector indices.
|
|
|
− 0% vesting if TSR below 50th percentile of
peer group.
|
|
|
− 50% vesting if TSR at 50th percentile of peer
group.
|
|
|
− Between 50th and 75th percentiles,
vesting on a straight line basis.
|
|
|
− 100% vesting if TSR is at least
75th percentile of peer group.
|
|
|
|
Vested/Lapsed
|
|
Lapsed with no options vesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
61
|
|
|
|
2001 JHI SE Equity Incentive Plan Deferred Bonus Program
(RSUs)
|
|
One-off grant of RSUs to senior executives made 17 June
2008.
|
|
|
Grant to CEO made 15 September 2008 under James Hardie
Industries Long Term Incentive Plan 2006.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Senior executives.
|
|
|
|
RSU exercise price
|
|
Nil.
|
|
|
|
Vesting schedule
|
|
100% vest on the 2nd anniversary of the grant.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
The RSUs vested and converted into shares granted on a
one-for-one basis.
|
|
|
|
James Hardie Industries Long Term Incentive Plan 2006 Hybrid
RSUs (RSUs)
|
|
Hybrid RSUs granted June 2009.
|
|
|
|
Offered to
|
|
Senior executives and Managing Board directors (1).
|
|
|
|
Option Exercise Price
|
|
Nil.
|
|
|
|
Vesting schedule (2009 grant only)
|
|
100% vest on the 2nd anniversary of the grant.
|
|
|
|
Expiration date
|
|
The RSUs vested and converted into shares granted on a
one-for-one basis.
|
|
|
|
Further details of equity incentive plans that expired during
fiscal year 2011 are provided in Note 16 to the consolidated
financial statements starting on page 99 of this annual report.
8. REMUNERATION
FOR NON-EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS
Fees paid to non-executive directors are determined by the
Board, with the advice of the Remuneration Committees
independent external remuneration advisers, within the maximum
total amount approved by shareholders from time to time. The
current aggregate fee pool of US$1,500,000 was approved by
shareholders in 2006.
Additional Board fees are not paid to executive Board directors.
8.1 Remuneration
Structure
Non-executive directors are paid a base fee for service on the
Board. Additional fees are paid to the person occupying the
positions of Chairman, Deputy Chairman and Board Committee
Chairman and to members of the Due Diligence Committee
(discussed below). All directors fees are paid in cash.
During fiscal year 2011, the Remuneration Committee reviewed
non-executive directors fees, using market data and taking
into consideration the level of fees paid to chairmen and
directors of companies with similar size, complexity of
operations and responsibilities, and workload requirements. As a
result of the review, the Remuneration Committee recommended
increasing non-executive director fees, excluding fees paid to
Committee Chairs, by 5% effective 1 April 2011.
The fees paid in fiscal year 2011, and payable in fiscal year
2012 are:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
Fiscal
|
|
|
|
(US $)
|
|
year
|
|
|
year
|
|
|
|
Role
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
|
Chairman
|
|
$
|
315,000
|
|
|
$
|
330,750
|
|
|
|
Deputy Chairman
|
|
$
|
183,750
|
|
|
$
|
192,938
|
|
|
|
Board member
|
|
$
|
136,500
|
|
|
$
|
143,325
|
|
|
|
Audit Committee Chairman
|
|
$
|
20,000
|
|
|
$
|
20,000
|
|
|
|
Remuneration or Nominating and Governance Committee Chairman
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
$
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
During fiscal year 2009, the Board formed the Due Diligence
Committee, comprised of representatives from the Board and
management. This committee was formed to assist the Board with
reviewing and considering alternative proposals to move the
companys domicile.
Non-executive directors who attended meetings of the Due
Diligence Committee received fees of US$1,500 per meeting, and
the Chairman received fees of $3,000 per meeting, in addition to
their base fee. The Due Diligence Committee met three times in
fiscal year 2011 as part of the completion of the Companys
Re-domicile.
As the focus of the Board is on the long-term direction and
well-being of James Hardie, there is no direct link between
non-executive directors remuneration and the short-term
results of the company.
8.2 Board
Accumulation Policy
Non-executive directors are expected to accumulate a minimum of
1.5 times (and two times for the Chairman) their total base
remuneration (excluding Board Committee fees) in JHI SE shares
(either personally, in the name of their spouse, or through a
personal superannuation or pension plan) over a reasonable time
following their appointment. The Remuneration Committee monitors
non-executive directors progress against this policy on a
periodic basis.
8.3 Supervisory
Board Share Plan
Under the Supervisory Board Share Plan 2006 (which we refer to
as the SBSP), non-executive directors could elect to
receive some of their annual fees in JHI SE shares. The
complexity of the four different jurisdictions in which the
companys individual directors are resident means that it
is easier for most directors to directly acquire shares to meet
the Board Accumulation Policy. As a result, the SBSP has been
discontinued.
8.4 Director
Retirement Benefits
The company does not provide any benefits for our non-executive
Board directors upon termination of employment.
|
|
62
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
REMUNERATION
REPORT
(CONTINUED)
8.5 Total
Remuneration for Non-Executive Directors for the Years Ended
31 March 2011 and 31 March 2010
The table below sets out the remuneration for those directors
who served on the Board during the fiscal years ended
31 March 2011 and 31 March 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(US dollars)
|
|
Primary
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Name
|
|
Directors
Fees1
|
|
|
JHI SE
Stock2
|
|
|
Other
Benefits3
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Hammes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
$
|
316,500
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6,065
|
|
|
$
|
322,565
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
221,000
|
|
|
|
85,000
|
|
|
|
10,641
|
|
|
|
316,641
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. McGauchie
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
193,750
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,659
|
|
|
|
195,409
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
185,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,428
|
|
|
|
187,428
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Anderson
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
159,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,005
|
|
|
|
160,505
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
155,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
8,290
|
|
|
|
173,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D.
Dilger4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
154,019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,431
|
|
|
|
156,450
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,784
|
|
|
|
76,784
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Harrison
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
146,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,456
|
|
|
|
147,956
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
130,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
150,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Osborne
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
138,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,483
|
|
|
|
140,483
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
127,500
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
990
|
|
|
|
138,490
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. van der Meer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
|
136,500
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,264
|
|
|
|
137,764
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
|
10,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Compensation for Non-Executive Directors
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2011
|
|
$
|
1,244,769
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
16,363
|
|
|
$
|
1,261,132
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Year 2010
|
|
|
1,013,500
|
|
|
|
125,000
|
|
|
|
34,133
|
|
|
|
1,172,633
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
Amount includes base, Chairman, Deputy Chairman, Committee
Chairman and Due Diligence Committee attendance fees.
|
|
2
|
The Supervisory Board Share Plan (SBSP) was discontinued for
fiscal year 2011. For fiscal year 2010, the actual amount spent
by each Board member was determined after deducting applicable
Dutch taxes from this amount. The number of JHI SE shares
acquired was determined by dividing the amount of participation
in the SBSP by the market purchase price. Refer to
section 8.3 for further details about the SBSP.
|
|
3
|
Other Benefits includes the cost of non-executive
directors fiscal compliance in The Netherlands and other
costs connected with Board-related events.
|
|
4
|
Mr. Dilger was appointed as a director effective
September 2, 2009. The amounts for fiscal year 2011 include
$17,519 fees paid for service on a number of the Companys
subsidiary boards, as approved by the Board.
|
8.6 Non-Executive
Directors Interests in JHISE
Changes in non-executive directors relevant interests in
JHI SE securities between 1 April 2010 and 31 March
2011 are set out below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of
|
|
|
Shares/CUFS
|
|
|
On market
|
|
|
Shares/CUFS at
|
|
|
At 1 April 2010
|
|
|
Purchases
|
|
|
31 March 2011
|
Michael Hammes
|
|
|
32,8471
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,847
|
Donald McGauchie
|
|
|
25,3722
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,372
|
Brian Anderson
|
|
|
7,635
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,635
|
David Dilger
|
|
|
25,0003
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,000
|
David Harrison
|
|
|
12,3844
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,384
|
James Osborne
|
|
|
2,551
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,551
|
Rudy van der Meer
|
|
|
17,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,290
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
9,000 shares/CUFS held as ADRs.
|
|
2
|
6,000 shares held for the McGauchie Superannuation
Fund.
|
|
3
|
25,000 shares held for the David Dilger Approved
Retirement Fund for which Mr Dilger is a beneficiary.
|
|
4
|
10,000 shares held as ADRs.
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
63
|
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
These Corporate Governance Principles describe the corporate
governance arrangements that have been followed by James Hardie
from the commencement of the fiscal year 2011 and contain an
overview of our corporate governance framework, developed and
approved by the Nominating and Governance Committee and, on its
recommendation, adopted by the Board in June 2011.
On 17 June 2010, we completed Stage 2 of a proposal to move
our corporate domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland, and as a
result James Hardie Industries SE moved its corporate seat to
Ireland (which we refer to as the Re-domicile).
Where applicable, these Corporate Governance Principles indicate
the changes in the Companys governance arrangements as a
result of implementing the Re-domicile. References to the Board
are references to the Supervisory Board prior to completion of
the Re-domicile, and to the single Board following completion of
the Re-domicile.
These Corporate Governance Principles, as well as our Articles
of Association, Board and Board Committee charters and key
company policies, as updated from time to time, are available
from the Investor Relations area of our website
(www.jameshardie.com) or by requesting a printed copy from the
Company Secretary at the Companys head office at
2nd Floor, Europa House, Harcourt Centre, Harcourt Street,
Dublin 2, Ireland.
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE AT JAMES HARDIE
OVERVIEW
James Hardie operates under the regulatory requirements of
numerous jurisdictions and organisations, including the ASX,
ASIC, the NYSE, the US SEC, the Irish Takeover Panel and various
other rulemaking bodies.
In addition, prior to completing Stage 2 of the Re-domicile, we
were also subject to the jurisdiction of the Dutch Authority
Financial Markets and the Dutch Corporate Governance Code.
James Hardies corporate governance framework is reviewed
regularly and updated as appropriate to reflect what we believe
is in our and our stakeholders interests, changes in law
and current best practices.
Our corporate governance framework incorporates processes and
policies designed to provide the Board with appropriate
assurance about the operations and governance of the Company and
thereby protect shareholder value. Further details of these
processes and policies are set out in this report.
BOARD
STRUCTURE
The responsibilities of our Board and Board Committees are
formalised in our Articles of Association and our Board
Committee charters, respectively. The Board has also reserved
certain matters to itself.
Number of
Boards
Since completion of Stage 2 of the Re-domicile, the Company has
had a single Board.
However, prior to the completion of the Re-domicile, James
Hardie had a two-tiered board structure, consisting of a
Supervisory Board and a Managing Board.
Single
Board
The Board comprises seven non-executive directors and the CEO.
The Board must have no less than three and not more than twelve
directors, as determined by the Board.
Board directors may be elected by our shareholders at general
meetings or by the Board if there is a vacancy. The Board and
our shareholders have the right to nominate candidates for the
Board. Board directors may be dismissed by our shareholders at a
general meeting.
Irish law provides that the Board is responsible for the
management and operation of James Hardie. The Board can, and
has, delegated authority to the CEO to manage the corporation
within specified authority levels. The Board has also reserved
certain matters to itself, including:
|
|
|
appointing, removing and assessing the performance and
remuneration of the CEO and CFO;
|
|
|
succession planning for the Board and senior management and
defining the Companys management structure and
responsibilities;
|
|
|
approving the overall strategy for the Company, including the
business plan and annual operating and capital expenditure
budgets;
|
|
|
convening and monitoring the operation of shareholder meetings
and approving matters to be submitted to shareholders for their
consideration;
|
|
|
approving annual and periodic reports, results announcements and
related media releases, and notices of shareholder meetings;
|
|
|
approving the dividend policy and interim dividends and making
recommendations to shareholders regarding the annual dividend;
|
|
|
reviewing the authority levels of the CEO and management;
|
|
|
approving the remuneration framework for the Company;
|
|
|
overseeing corporate governance matters for the Company;
|
|
|
approving corporate-level Company policies;
|
|
|
considering managements recommendations on various matters
which are above the authority levels delegated to the CEO or
management; and
|
|
|
any other matter which the Board considers ought to be approved
by the Board.
|
The full list of those matters reserved to the Board are
formalised in our Board reserved powers charter, which is
available on our website (www.jameshardie.com, select Investor
Relations, Corporate Governance, then Board Powers).
In discharging its duties, the Board aims to take into account
the interests of James Hardie, its enterprise (including the
interests of its employees), shareholders, other stakeholders
and other parties involved in or with James Hardie.
SUPERVISORY
BOARD
The Supervisory Board was in existence until 17 June 2010,
when it was replaced by the single Board. It comprised only
non-executive directors, with at least two members or a higher
number as determined by the Supervisory Board.
The Supervisory Board supervised and provided advice to the
Managing Board, and was responsible for, amongst other matters:
|
|
|
nominating Managing Board directors for election by shareholders;
|
|
|
appointing and removing the CEO and the Chairman of the Managing
Board;
|
|
|
approving Managing Board decisions relating to specified matters
or above agreed thresholds;
|
|
|
approving the strategic plan and annual budget proposed by the
Managing Board;
|
|
|
64
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
(CONTINUED)
|
|
|
approving the annual financial accounts;
|
|
|
supervising the policy and actions of the Managing Board;
|
|
|
supervising the general course of affairs of James Hardie and
the business it operates;
|
|
|
approving issues of new shares;
|
|
|
approving declaration of dividends;
|
|
|
approving any share buy-back programs and cancelling the shares
bought back;
|
|
|
approving any significant changes in the identity or nature of
the Company;
|
|
|
approving the strategy set by the Managing Board;
|
|
|
monitoring Company performance; and
|
|
|
maintaining effective external disclosure policies and
procedures.
|
MANAGING
BOARD
The Managing Board was in existence until 17 June 2010,
when it ceased to exist and the CEO joined the single Board. It
comprised only executive directors, with at least two members or
such higher number as determined by the Supervisory Board.
The Managing Board was accountable to the Supervisory Board and
to the shareholders for the
day-to-day
management of the Company, including:
|
|
|
administering the Companys general affairs, operations and
finance;
|
|
|
preparing a strategic plan and budget setting out operational
and financial objectives, implementation strategy and parameters
for the Company for the next three years, for approval by the
Supervisory Board;
|
|
|
ensuring the implementation of the Companys strategic plan;
|
|
|
preparing quarterly and annual accounts, management reports and
media releases;
|
|
|
monitoring the Companys compliance with all relevant
legislation and regulations and managing the risks associated
with the Companys activities;
|
|
|
reporting and discussing the Companys internal risk
management and control systems with the Supervisory Board and
the Audit Committee; and
|
|
|
representing, entering into and performing agreements on behalf
of the Company.
|
OPERATION
OF THE BOARD
BOARD
MEETINGS
The Board meets at least four times a year or whenever the
Chairman or three or more members have requested a meeting.
Meetings are generally held at the Companys offices in
Ireland (and in The Netherlands prior to completion of the
Re-domicile). At each physical meeting, the Board meets in
executive session without management present for at least part
of the meeting. The Board may also delegate some of its powers
to a
sub-committee
of the Board or pass resolutions by written consent.
The number of Board and Board Committee meetings held, and each
directors attendance during the fiscal year, is set out
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nominating &
|
|
Managing
|
Name
|
|
Board
|
|
Audit
|
|
Remuneration
|
|
Governance
|
|
Board
|
|
|
H
|
|
A
|
|
H
|
|
A
|
|
H
|
|
A
|
|
H
|
|
A
|
|
H
|
|
A
|
Hammes
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
6
|
|
6
|
|
5
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anderson
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
6
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dilger
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
3
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Harrison
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
|
8
|
|
6
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
McGauchie
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
6
|
|
5
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Osborne
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Van der Meer
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gries
|
|
7
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chenu
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cox
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H
|
|
=
|
|
Number of meetings held during the time the Director held office
or was a member of the Committee during the fiscal year.
|
A
|
|
=
|
|
Number of meetings attended during the time the Director held
office or was a member of the Committee during the fiscal year.
Non-Committee members also attend Committee meetings from time
to time; these attendances are not shown.
|
DIRECTOR
QUALIFICATIONS
Directors have skills, qualifications, experience and expertise
which assist the Board to fulfill its responsibilities and
assist the Company to create shareholder value. The skills,
qualifications, experience and relevant expertise of each
director, and his or her term of appointment, are summarised
above in the Board of Directors biography section and also
appear in the Investor Relations area of our website
(www.jameshardie.com).
Directors must be able to devote a sufficient amount of time to
prepare for, and effectively participate in, Board and Board
Committee meetings.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
65
|
The Nominating and Governance
Committee reviews the other commitments of Board members each
year.
SUCCESSION
PLANNING
The Board, together with the Nominating and Governance
Committee, has developed, and periodically reviews with the CEO,
management succession plans, policies and procedures for our CEO
and other senior executives.
The Board and Nominating and Governance Committee have also
spent significant time over the past years considering the
appropriate composition of the Board.
During the year, the Board and Nominating and Governance
Committee considered the desired profile of the Board, including
the right number, mix of skills, qualifications, experience,
expertise, diversity and geographic location of its directors,
to maximise the effectiveness of the Board.
RETIREMENT AND
TENURE POLICY
The Company does not have a retirement and tenure policy. The
length of tenure of individual Board directors is considered as
part of the Boards decision-making process when
considering whether a director should be recommended by the
Board for re-election.
BOARD
EVALUATION
The Nominating and Governance Committee supervises the director
evaluation process and makes recommendations to the Board.
During fiscal year 2011, a purpose-designed survey was used by
directors to self-assess the operation of the Board and each
Board Committee, and the results were reviewed and discussed by
the Nominating and Governance Committee and the Board.
The Chairman discussed with each Board director, and the Deputy
Chairman discussed with the Chairman, his performance and
contribution to the effectiveness of the Board. The Nominating
and Governance Committee and the Board discuss annually the
performance of the CEO and the CEOs direct reports, and
the Chairman provides that feedback to the CEO. The CEO uses the
feedback as part of an annual review of his direct reports.
DIRECTOR
RE-ELECTION
The Boards overriding desire is to maximise its
effectiveness by appointing the best candidates for vacancies
and closely reviewing the performance of directors subject to
re-election.
No director (other than the CEO) shall hold office for a
continuous period of more than three years, or past the end of
the third Annual General Meeting (AGM) following his or her
appointment, whichever is longer, without submitting him or
herself for re-election. A person appointed to the Board must
submit him or herself for re-election at the next AGM.
Directors are not automatically nominated for re-election at the
end of their term. Nomination for re-election is based on their
individual performance and the Companys needs. The
Nominating and Governance Committee and the Board discuss in
detail the performance of each director due to stand for
re-election at the next AGM before deciding whether to recommend
their re-election.
Because the Company is a European SE company, the CEO is
required to stand for re-election every six years as long as he
remains as the CEO. The Company believes this policy is
appropriate (having regard to Australian practice under the
rules of the ASX) as it supports the continuity of management
performance.
INDEPENDENCE
The Company requires the majority of directors on the Board and
Board Committees, as well as the Chairman of the Board and Board
Committees, to be independent, unless a greater number is
required to be independent under the rules and regulations of
the ASX, the NYSE or any other applicable regulatory body.
Each year the Board, together with the Nominating and Governance
Committee, assesses each Board director and his or her responses
to a lengthy questionnaire on matters relevant to his or her
independence according to the rules and regulations of Irish
law, the NYSE and SEC as well as the Corporate Governance
Council Principles and Recommendations published by the ASX
Corporate Governance Council (the Principles and
Recommendations). Following this assessment, the Board has
determined that each Board director is independent.
All directors are expected to bring their independent views and
judgment to the Board and Board Committees and must declare any
potential or actual conflicts of interest. The Board has not set
materiality thresholds for assessing independence and considers
all relationships on a
case-by-case
basis, considering the accounting standards approach to
materiality and the rules and regulations of the applicable
exchange or regulatory body.
The Board considered the following specific matters prior to
determining that each director was independent:
|
|
|
Brian Anderson is a director of Pulte Homes, a home builder in
the United States. Pulte Homes does not buy any James Hardie
products directly from the Company, although it does buy a small
amount of James Hardie products through the Companys
customers and receives a rebate from James Hardie in respect of
those purchases;
|
|
|
Rudy van der Meer was until 1 January 2011 a member of the
Supervisory Board of ING Bank Nederland N.V. and ING
Verzekeringen (Insurance) Nederland N.V. Entities in the ING
Group provide financial services to the Company. In each case
those entities were providing these services to the Company
prior to Mr van der Meer becoming a Board director; and
|
|
|
David Dilger is a director of a number of James Hardies
subsidiaries and receives directors fees for such service
approved by the Board of James Hardie Industries SE.
|
Any transactions mentioned above were conducted on an
arms-length basis and in accordance with normal terms and
conditions and were not material to any of the companies listed
above or to James Hardie. Each of these relationships, other
than Mr Dilgers service as a director of a number of James
Hardies subsidiaries, existed and was disclosed before the
person in question became a Board director. It is not considered
that these directors had any influence over these transactions.
INDUCTION
The Company has an induction program for new directors, which
was reviewed and updated during the fiscal year. The program
includes an overview of the Companys governance
arrangements and directors duties in Ireland, the United
States and Australia, plant and market tours to impart relevant
industry knowledge, briefings on the Companys risk
management and control framework, financial results and key
risks and issues, and meeting other Board directors, the CEO and
members of management. New directors are provided with
comprehensive orientation materials including relevant corporate
documents and policies.
|
|
66
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
(CONTINUED)
BOARD CONTINUING
DEVELOPMENT
The Company operates within a complex industry, geographical and
regulatory framework. The Company regularly schedules time at
physical Board meetings to develop the Boards
understanding of the Companys operations and regulatory
environment, including updates on topical developments from
management and external experts. An annual plant and market tour
forms an important part of the Boards continuing
development.
LETTER OF
APPOINTMENT
Each incoming Board director receives a letter of appointment
setting out the key terms and conditions of his or her
appointment and the Companys expectations of them in that
role. We do not provide any benefits for our Board non-executive
directors upon termination of employment.
CHAIRMAN
The Board appoints one of its members as the Chairman. The
Chairman must be an independent, non-executive director. The
Chairman appoints the Deputy Chairman. The Chairman co-ordinates
the Boards duties and responsibilities and acts as the
main contact with the CEO.
The Chairman:
|
|
|
provides leadership to the Board;
|
|
|
chairs Board and shareholder meetings;
|
|
|
facilitates Board discussion;
|
|
|
monitors, evaluates and assesses the performance of the
Companys Board and Board Committees; and
|
|
|
is a member of and attends meetings of all Board Committees.
|
The Chairman may not also be the Chairman of the Audit
Committee. The current Chairman is Mr Hammes and the current
Deputy Chairman is Mr McGauchie.
REMUNERATION
A detailed description of the Companys remuneration
policies for directors and executives, and the link to
performance, is set out in the Remuneration Report above.
INDEMNIFICATION
The Companys Articles of Association provide for
indemnification of any person who is (or keep indemnified any
person who was) a Board director, the company secretary, or an
employee or any other person deemed by the Board to be an agent
of the Company, who suffers any loss as a result of any action
in discharge of their duties, provided they acted in good faith
in carrying out their duties. This indemnification will
generally not be available if the person seeking indemnification
acted with gross negligence or willful misconduct in performing
their duties.
The Company and some of its subsidiaries have provided Deeds of
Access, Insurance and Indemnity to Board directors and senior
executives who are officers or directors of the Company or its
subsidiaries.
EVALUATION OF
MANAGEMENT
At least once a year, the CEO, the Remuneration Committee and
the Board review the performance of each member of the Group
Management Team against agreed performance measures. The CEO
uses this feedback to assist in the annual review of members of
the Group Management Team. This process was followed during the
fiscal year.
INFORMATION FOR
THE BOARD
Board directors receive timely and necessary information to
allow them to fulfill their duties, including access to senior
executives if required. The Nominating and Governance Committee
periodically reviews the format, timeliness and content of
information provided to the Board.
In discharging their duties, Board directors are provided with
direct access to senior executives and outside advisors and
auditors. The Board, Board Committees and individual directors
may all seek independent professional advice at the
Companys expense for the proper performance of their
duties.
The Board has regular discussions with the CEO regarding the
Companys strategy and performance, including two sessions
each year where Board members formally review the Companys
strategy and progress. The Board and each Board Committee have
also scheduled an annual calendar of topics to be covered to
assist them to properly discharge all of their responsibilities.
Board directors receive a copy of all Board Committee papers for
physical meetings and may attend any Board Committee meeting,
whether or not they are members of the Board Committee. Board
directors also receive the minutes which record each Board
Committees deliberations and findings, as well as oral
reports from each Board Committee Chairman.
DELEGATION TO THE
CEO
The Board has delegated to the CEO the power to manage the
business of the Company to achieve the mission statements and
corporate goals approved by the Board from time to time. This
delegation is subject to a specified monetary cap for a range of
matters, above which Board approval is required.
BOARD
COMMITTEES
The Board Committees are generally committees of the Board and
comprise the Audit Committee, the Nominating and Governance
Committee and the Remuneration Committee. The Board Committee
charters are available from the Investor Relations area of our
website (www.jameshardie.com). The Board may also delegate some
of its powers or specific decisions to ad hoc committees from
time to time.
Each Board Committee meets at least quarterly and has scheduled
an annual calendar of meeting and discussion topics to assist it
to properly discharge all of its responsibilities.
AUDIT
COMMITTEE
The Audit Committee oversees the adequacy and effectiveness of
the Companys accounting and financial policies and
controls. The key aspects of the terms of reference followed by
our Audit Committee are set out in this report. The Audit
Committee meets at least quarterly in a separate executive
session with the external auditor and internal auditor,
respectively.
Currently, the members of the Audit Committee are Mr Anderson
(Chairman), Mr Dilger, Mr Hammes and Mr Harrison.
All members of the Audit Committee must be financially literate
and must have sufficient business, industry and financial
expertise to act effectively as members of the Audit Committee.
At least one member of the Audit Committee shall be an
audit committee financial expert as determined by
the Nominating and Governance Committee and the Board in
accordance with the SEC rules. These may be the same person. The
Nominating and Governance Committee and the Board have
determined
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
67
|
that Mr Anderson, Mr Harrison and
Mr Dilger are audit committee financial experts.
The Audit Committee provides advice and assistance to the Board
in fulfilling its responsibilities and, amongst other matters:
|
|
|
overseeing the Companys financial reporting process and
reports on the results of its activities to the Board;
|
|
|
reviewing with management and the external auditor the
Companys annual and quarterly financial statements and
reports to shareholders;
|
|
|
discussing earnings releases as well as information and earnings
guidance provided to analysts;
|
|
|
reviewing and assessing the Companys risk management
policies and procedures;
|
|
|
having general oversight of the appointment and provision of all
external audit services to the Company, the remuneration paid to
the external auditor, and the performance of the Companys
internal audit function;
|
|
|
reviewing the adequacy and effectiveness of the Companys
internal compliance and control procedures;
|
|
|
reviewing the Companys compliance with legal and
regulatory requirements; and
|
|
|
establishing procedures for complaints regarding accounting,
internal accounting controls and auditing matters, including any
complaints from whistleblowers.
|
Conflicts of
Interest
The Audit Committee oversees the Companys Code of Business
Conduct and Ethics policy and other business-related conflict of
interest issues as they arise.
Reporting
The Audit Committee will inform the Board of any general issues
that arise with respect to the quality or integrity of the
Companys financial statements, the Companys
compliance with legal or regulatory requirements, the
Companys risk management systems, the performance and
independence of the external auditor, or the performance of the
internal audit function.
NOMINATING AND
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE
The Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for:
|
|
|
identifying and recommending to the Board individuals qualified
to become Board directors;
|
|
|
overseeing the evaluation of the Board and senior management;
|
|
|
assessing the independence of each Board director;
|
|
|
reviewing the conduct of the AGM; and
|
|
|
performing a leadership role in shaping the Companys
corporate governance policies.
|
The current members of the Nominating and Governance Committee
are Mr McGauchie (Chairman), Mr Hammes, Mr Osborne and Mr van
der Meer.
REMUNERATION
COMMITTEE
The Remuneration Committee oversees the Companys overall
remuneration structure, policies and programs; assesses whether
the Companys remuneration structure establishes
appropriate incentives for management and employees; and
approves any significant changes in the Companys
remuneration structure, policies and programs. It also:
|
|
|
administers and makes recommendations on the Companys
incentive compensation and equity-based remuneration plans;
|
|
|
reviews the remuneration of Board directors;
|
|
|
reviews the remuneration framework for the Company;
|
|
|
makes recommendations to the Board on the Companys
recruitment, retention and termination policies and procedures
for senior management.
|
Members of the Remuneration Committee must qualify as
non-employee directors for purposes of
Rule 16b-3
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), and outside directors for purposes of
Section 162(m) of the US Internal Revenue Code.
Further details on the role of the Remuneration Committee are
disclosed in the Remuneration Report above.
The current members of the Remuneration Committee are Mr
Harrison (Chairman), Mr Anderson, Mr Dilger, Mr Hammes and Mr
McGauchie.
POLICIES
AND PROCESSES
As noted at the start of this report, we have a number of
policies that address key aspects of our corporate governance.
These include:
|
|
|
Code of Business Conduct and Ethics;
|
|
|
Ethics Hotline;
|
|
|
Continuous Disclosure and Market Communication; and
|
|
|
Insider Trading.
|
Copies of all these policies are available in the Investor
Relations area of our website (www.jameshardie.com).
CODE OF BUSINESS
CONDUCT AND ETHICS
We seek to maintain high standards of integrity and we are
committed to ensuring that James Hardie conducts its business in
accordance with high standards of ethical behaviour. We require
our employees to comply with the spirit and the letter of all
laws and other statutory requirements governing the conduct of
James Hardies activities in each country in which we
operate. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics applies to all
of our employees and directors. The Code of Business Conduct and
Ethics covers many aspects of Company policy that govern
compliance with legal and other responsibilities to
stakeholders. All directors and Company employees worldwide are
reminded annually of the existence of the Code and asked to
confirm that they have read it. The Audit Committee reviewed and
revised the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics policy during
the fiscal year.
We have not granted any waivers from the provisions of our Code
of Business Conduct and Ethics during fiscal year 2011.
COMPLAINTS/ETHICS
HOTLINE
Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics policy provides
employees with advice about who they should contact if they have
information or
|
|
68
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
(CONTINUED)
questions regarding violations of
the policy. James Hardie has a telephone Ethics Hotline operated
by an independent external provider which allows employees to
report anonymously any concerns. All Company employees worldwide
are reminded annually of the existence of the Ethics Hotline.
All complaints, whether to the Ethics Hotline or otherwise, are
initially reported directly to the General Counsel and Director
of Internal Audit (except in cases where the complaint refers to
one of them). The most serious complaints are referred
immediately to the Chairmen of the Audit Committee and Board.
Less serious complaints are reported to the Audit Committee on a
quarterly basis.
Interested parties who have a concern about James Hardies
conduct, including accounting, internal accounting controls or
audit matters, may communicate directly with the Companys
Chairman (or Presiding Director for NYSE purposes), Deputy
Chairman, Board directors as a group, the Chairman of the Audit
Committee or Audit Committee members. These communications may
be confidential or anonymous, and may be submitted in writing to
the Company Secretary at the Companys head office at
2nd Floor, Europa House, Harcourt Centre, Harcourt Street,
Dublin 2, Ireland or submitted by phone at Telephone +353 (0)1
411 6924. All concerns will be forwarded to the appropriate
Board directors for their review and will be simultaneously
reviewed and addressed by our General Counsel in the same way
that other concerns are addressed. Our Code of Business Conduct
and Ethics policy, which is described above, prohibits any
employee from retaliating or taking any adverse action against
anyone for raising or helping to resolve a concern about
integrity.
CONTINUOUS
DISCLOSURE AND MARKET COMMUNICATION
We strive to comply with all relevant disclosure laws and
listing rules in Australia (ASX and ASIC) and the United States
(SEC and NYSE).
Our Continuous Disclosure and Market Communication Policy aims
to ensure timely communications so that investors can readily:
|
|
|
understand James Hardies strategy and assess the quality
of its management;
|
|
|
examine James Hardies financial position and the strength
of its growth prospects; and
|
|
|
receive any news or information that might reasonably be
expected to materially affect the price or market for James
Hardie securities.
|
The CEO is responsible for ensuring the Company complies with
our continuous disclosure obligations. A Disclosure Committee
comprised of the CEO, CFO, General Counsel and the Vice
President Investor and Media Relations is
responsible for all decisions regarding our market disclosure
obligations outside of the Companys normal financial
reporting calendar. For our quarterly and annual results
releases, the CEO and CFO are supported by the Financial
Statements Disclosure Committee, which provides assurance
regarding our compliance with reporting processes and controls.
The CEO, CFO and General Counsel discuss with the Audit
Committee any issues arising out of meetings of the Financial
Statements Disclosure Committee that affect the quarterly and
annual results releases before they are approved by the Board.
The Audit Committee reviewed the Companys disclosure
practices under the Continuous Disclosure and Market
Communication policy and revised the policy during the fiscal
year.
SHARE
TRADING
All Company employees and directors are subject to our Insider
Trading Policy. Company employees and directors may only buy or
sell the Companys securities within four weeks beginning
two days after the announcement of quarterly or full year
results, or another period designated by the Board for this
purpose, provided they are not in possession of material
non-public price sensitive information. There are additional
restrictions on trading for designated senior employees and
directors, including a requirement that they receive prior
clearance from the Companys compliance officer before
trading or pledging their shares by taking out a margin loan
over them, and a general prohibition on hedging or selling any
shares or options for shortswing profit. Company employees who
are not designated employees may hedge vested options or shares,
provided they notify the Company. There is a general prohibition
on hedging unvested shares, options or RSUs.
The Board recognises that it is the individual responsibility of
each James Hardie director and employee to ensure he or she
complies with the spirit and the letter of insider trading laws
and that notification to the compliance officer in no way
implies approval of any transaction.
The Audit Committee reviewed the Companys share trading
approval practices under the Insider Trading policy and revised
the policy during the fiscal year.
RISK
MANAGEMENT
OVERALL
RESPONSIBILITY
The Audit Committee and the Board reviewed our risk management
processes during the fiscal year.
The Audit Committee has oversight of the Companys risk
management policies, procedures and controls. The Audit
Committee reviews, monitors and discusses these matters with the
CEO, CFO, General Counsel and Director of Internal Audit. The
Audit Committee, CEO, CFO and General Counsel report
periodically to the Board on the Companys risk management
policies, processes and controls.
The Audit Committee is supported in its oversight role by the
policies put in place by management to oversee and manage
material business risks, as well as the roles played by the
Corporate, US and Asia Pacific Risk Management Committees, as
described below, and internal and external audit functions. The
internal and external audit functions are separate from and
independent of each other and each has a direct reporting line
to the Audit Committee.
At a management level, the GMT (comprising in fiscal year 2011
the CEO, CFO, General Counsel, Executive General Manager USA,
Executive General Manager International and the Vice President
of Investor and Media Relations) is the primary management forum
for risk assessment and management within the Company.
OBJECTIVE
The Company considers that a sound framework of risk management
policies, procedures and controls produces a system of risk
oversight, risk management and internal control that is
fundamental to good corporate governance and creation of
shareholder value. The objective of the Companys risk
management policies, procedures and controls is to ensure that:
|
|
|
our risk management systems are effective;
|
|
|
our principal strategic, operational and financial risks are
identified;
|
|
|
effective systems are in place to monitor and manage
risks; and
|
|
|
69
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
(CONTINUED)
|
|
|
reporting systems, internal controls and arrangements for
monitoring compliance with laws and regulations are adequate.
|
Risk management does not involve avoiding all risks. The
Companys risk management policies seek to strike a balance
between ensuring that the Company continues to generate
financial returns and simultaneously manages risks appropriately
by setting appropriate strategies and objectives.
POLICIES FOR
MANAGEMENT OF MATERIAL BUSINESS RISKS
Management has put in place a number of key policies, processes
and independent controls to provide assurance as to the
integrity of our systems of internal control and risk
management. In addition to the measures described elsewhere in
this report, the more significant policies, processes or
controls adopted by the Company for oversight and management of
material business risks are:
|
|
|
quarterly meetings of the corporate, US and Asia Pacific Risk
Management Committees to assess the key strategic, operations,
reporting and compliance risks facing the Company, the level of
risk and the processes implemented to manage each of these key
risks over the upcoming twelve months;
|
|
|
quarterly reporting to the GMT, Audit Committee, and annual
reporting to the Board, of the Risk Management Committees
assessment regarding the key strategic, operations, reporting
and compliance risks facing the Company;
|
|
|
a program for the Audit Committee to review in detail each year
all items identified by the Risk Management Committees as high
level risks;
|
|
|
meetings of the Financial Statements Disclosure Committee to
review all quarterly and annual results;
|
|
|
a planning process involving the preparation of three-year
strategic plans and a rolling twelve month forecast;
|
|
|
annual budgeting and monthly reporting to monitor performance;
|
|
|
an internal audit department with a reporting line direct to the
Chairman of the Audit Committee;
|
|
|
regular monitoring of the Companys liquidity and status of
finance facilities;
|
|
|
maintaining an appropriate insurance program;
|
|
|
maintaining policies and procedures in relation to treasury
operations, including the use of financial derivatives;
|
|
|
issuing and revising standards and procedures in relation to
environmental and health and safety matters;
|
|
|
implementing and maintaining training programs in relation to
legal issues such as trade practices/antitrust, trade secrecy,
and intellectual property protection;
|
|
|
issuing procedures requiring significant capital and recurring
expenditure to be approved at the appropriate levels; and
|
|
|
documenting detailed accounting policies, procedures and
guidance for the group in a single group finance manual.
|
A summary of these policies, processes and controls is available
in the Investor Relations area of our website
(www.jameshardie.com).
During the fiscal year, the Audit Committee and, through it, the
Board received a number of reports on the operation and
effectiveness of the policies, processes and controls described
in this section. This included a review of the Companys
current compliance programs and disclosure controls and
processes, how they compare with best practices and the steps
proposed by management to continue cultivating the
Companys risk management culture.
RISK MANAGEMENT
COMMITTEE
During the fiscal year, the Risk Management Committee was
divided into three separate committees, one for Corporate, one
for the US business and one for the non-US business, to allow
each committee to focus on individual risks in greater detail.
Each Committee comprises a cross-functional group of employees
and reviews and monitors the risks facing the Company in their
area of responsibility. The Risk Committees are coordinated by
the Director of Internal Audit and report on a quarterly basis
to the GMT. The Risk Committees also provide quarterly reports
to the Audit Committee on the procedures in place for
identifying, monitoring, managing and reporting on the principal
strategic, operational, financial and legal risks facing the
Company.
INTERNAL
AUDIT
The Director of Internal Audit heads the internal audit
department. The Internal Audit charter sets out the independence
of the internal audit department, its scope of work,
responsibilities and audit plan. The internal audit
departments workplan is approved annually by the Audit
Committee. The Director of Internal Audit reports to the
Chairman of the Audit Committee and meets quarterly with the
Audit Committee and Board in executive sessions.
EXTERNAL
AUDIT
The external auditor reviews each quarterly and half-year
consolidated financial statements and audits the full year
consolidated financial statements. The external auditor attends
each meeting of the Audit Committee, including an executive
session where only members of the Audit Committee and Board
directors are present. The Audit Committee has approved policies
to ensure that all non-audit services performed by the external
auditor, including the amount of fees payable for those
services, receive prior approval. The Audit Committee also
reviews the remuneration paid to the external auditor and makes
recommendations to the Board regarding the maximum compensation
to be paid to the external auditor.
The Audit Committee reviews and approves management
representations made to the external auditor as part of the
audit of the full year results.
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS DISCLOSURE COMMITTEE
The Financial Statements Disclosure Committee is a management
committee comprising senior finance, accounting, compliance,
legal, tax, treasury and investor relations executives in the
Company, which meets with the CEO, CFO and General Counsel prior
to the Boards consideration of any quarterly or annual
results. The Financial Statements Disclosure Committee is a
forum for the CEO, CFO and General Counsel to discuss, and, on
the basis of those discussions, report to the Audit Committee,
about a range of risk management procedures, policies and
controls, covering the draft results materials, business unit
financial performance and the current status of legal, tax,
treasury, accounting, compliance, internal audit, complaints and
disclosure control matters.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
70
|
CEO AND CFO
CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL REPORTS
Under SEC rules and the Companys internal control
arrangements, our CEO and CFO provide certain certifications
with respect to our full year financial statements, disclosure
controls and procedures and internal controls over financial
reporting. These certifications are more comprehensive and
detailed than those required under the Australian Corporations
Act and are considered appropriate given that the Companys
financial reports are prepared in accordance with US GAAP.
The Board in turn receives quarterly assurance from the
Financial Statements Disclosure Committee relating to the
Companys disclosure controls and procedures and internal
controls over financial reporting. This assurance is supported
by written quarterly and annual
sub-certifications
from the General Managers and Chief Financial Officers of each
business unit, the Director Treasury and the Corporate
Controller and the annual certifications from the Group
Management Team.
INTERNAL CONTROLS
AND SOX 404
Each fiscal year, the members of the GMT, and key members of the
Companys business and corporate functions, complete an
internal control certificate that seeks to confirm that adequate
internal controls are in place and are operating effectively,
and evaluate any failings and weaknesses.
MANAGEMENTS
ANNUAL REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
EVALUATION OF
DISCLOSURE CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
We carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the
participation of our management, including our Chief Executive
Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the
design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in
Rule 13a-15(e)
under the Exchange Act) as of the end of the period covered by
this report. In designing and evaluating our disclosure controls
and procedures, our management recognises that any controls and
procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can
provide only reasonable assurance of achieving the desired
control objectives and are subject to certain limitations,
including the exercise of judgment by individuals, the
difficulty in identifying unlikely future events, and the
difficulty in eliminating misconduct completely. Based upon that
evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer have concluded that, our disclosure controls and
procedures were effective at a reasonable assurance level as of
31 March 2011, to ensure the information required to be
disclosed in the reports that we file or submit under the
Exchange Act were recorded, processed, summarised and reported
within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the
SEC and that such information was accumulated and communicated
to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer, to allow for timely decisions regarding
required disclosures.
MANAGEMENTS
REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining
adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in
Rule 13a-15(f)
of the Exchange Act. Because of its inherent limitations,
internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or
detect all misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of
effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions,
or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures
may deteriorate.
We assessed the effectiveness of our internal control over
financial reporting as of 31 March 2011. In making this
assessment, we used the criteria set forth by the Committee of
Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in
Internal Control Integrated Framework. Based
on our assessment using those criteria, we concluded that our
internal control over financial reporting was effective as of
31 March 2011.
The effectiveness of our internal control over financial
reporting as of 31 March 2011 has been audited by
Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public
accounting firm, as stated in their report below.
CHANGES IN
INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
There were no changes in our internal controls over financial
reporting that occurred during the period covered by this annual
report on
Form 20-F
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
|
|
71
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE
(CONTINUED)
Report
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of
Directors and Shareholders of James Hardie Industries SE:
We have audited James Hardie Industries SEs internal
control over financial reporting as of 31 March 2011, based
on criteria established in Internal Control
Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (the COSO criteria).
James Hardie Industries SEs management is responsible for
maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting,
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control
over financial reporting included in the accompanying
Managements Annual Report on Internal Control over
Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion
on the companys internal control over financial reporting
based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control
over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of
internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk
that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the
design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on
the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a
process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the
reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of
financial statements for external purposes in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. A companys
internal control over financial reporting includes those
policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance
of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly
reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the
company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions
are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial
statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company
are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and directors of the company; and (3) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the
companys assets that could have a material effect on the
financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over
financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.
Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future
periods are subject to the risk that controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree
of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, James Hardie Industries SE maintained, in all
material respects, effective internal control over financial
reporting as of 31 March 2011 based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the
consolidated balance sheets of James Hardie Industries SE as of
31 March 2011 and 2010, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, changes in shareholders deficit,
and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended
31 March 2011, and our report dated 19 May 2011
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Orange County, California
19 May 2011
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
72
|
LIMITATIONS OF
CONTROL SYSTEMS
Our management does not expect that our internal risk management
and control systems will prevent or detect all error and all
fraud. No matter how well it is designed and operated, a control
system can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that
the control systems objectives will be met.
The design of a control system must reflect the fact that there
are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be
considered relative to their costs. Further, because of the
inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of
controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due
to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and
instances of fraud, if any, within the Company have been
detected.
These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments
in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur
because of simple error or mistake. Controls can also be
circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by
collusion of two or more people, or by management override of
the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in
part on certain assumptions about the likelihood of future
events, and there can be no assurance that any design will
succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future
conditions. Projections of any evaluation of controls
effectiveness to future periods are subject to risks. Over time,
controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions
or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies or
procedures.
SHAREHOLDERS
PARTICIPATION
LISTING
INFORMATION
James Hardie securities trade as CUFS on the ASX and as ADSs
(which reference American Depositary Shares) on the NYSE.
ANNUAL GENERAL
MEETING (AGM)
The 2010 AGM was held in Ireland and simultaneously broadcast to
a meeting in Sydney. Shareholders in both locations were able to
participate in the meeting, including voting and asking
questions.
Each shareholder (other than an ADS holder) has the right to:
|
|
|
attend the AGM either in person or by proxy;
|
|
|
speak at the AGM; and
|
|
|
exercise voting rights, including at the AGM subject to their
instructions on the Voting Instruction Form.
|
While ADS holders cannot vote directly, ADS holders can direct
the voting of their underlying shares through the ADS depositary.
The external auditor attends the AGM and is available to answer
questions.
COMMUNICATION
We are committed to communicating effectively with our
shareholders through a program that includes:
|
|
|
making management briefings and presentations accessible via a
live webcast
and/or
teleconference following the release of quarterly and annual
results;
|
|
|
audio webcasts of other management briefings and webcasts of the
annual shareholder meeting;
|
|
|
a comprehensive Investor Relations website that displays all
Company announcements and notices (promptly after they have been
cleared by the ASX), major management and investor road show
presentations;
|
|
|
site visits and briefings on strategy for investment analysts;
|
|
|
an email alert service to advise shareholders and other
interested parties of announcements and other events; and
|
|
|
equality of access for shareholders and investment analysts to
briefings, presentations and meetings and equality of media
access to the Company, on a reasonable basis.
|
INVESTOR
WEBSITE
We have a dedicated section on corporate governance as part of
the Investor Relations area of our website
(www.jameshardie.com). Information on this section of the
website is progressively updated and expanded to ensure it
presents the most
up-to-date
information on our corporate governance structure. Except where
stated, the contents of the website are not incorporated into
this annual report.
COMPLIANCE
WITH CORPORATE GOVERNANCE REQUIREMENTS
ASX PRINCIPLES
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Listed Australian companies are encouraged to comply with the
Principles and Recommendations. Except where otherwise stated,
the Company has complied with the Principles and Recommendations
for the entire period described in this annual report.
For the benefit of Australian holders, the Investor Relations
area of our website (www.jameshardie.com) contains more detail
about the ways in which we comply with the Principles and
Recommendations.
The Board has discussed the revisions to the Principles and
Recommendations, which apply to financial years commencing
1 January 2011. Although we note that companies with a
balance date of 30 June 2010 have been encouraged to adopt
the policy in advance as part of their 2011 annual reports,
James Hardie, which has a balance date of 31 March, will
report against the new requirements as part of its 2012 annual
report.
NYSE CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE RULES
In accordance with the NYSE corporate governance standards,
listed companies that are foreign private issuers (which
includes James Hardie) are permitted to follow home-country
practice in lieu of the provisions of the corporate governance
rules contained in Section 303A of the Listed Company
Manual, except that foreign private issuers are required to
comply with Section 303A.06, Section 303A.11 and
Section 303A.12(b) and (c), each of which is discussed
below.
Section 303A.06 requires that all listed companies have an
Audit Committee that satisfies the requirements of
Rule 10A-3
under the Exchange Act.
Section 303A.11 provides that listed foreign private
issuers must disclose any significant ways in which their
corporate governance practices differ from those followed by US
companies under the NYSE listing standards.
Section 303A.12(b) provides that each listed companys
CEO must promptly notify the NYSE in writing after any executive
officer of the listed company becomes aware of any material
non-compliance with any applicable provisions of
Section 303A. Section 303A.12(c) provides that
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
73
|
each listed company must submit an
executed written affirmation annually to the NYSE about its
compliance with the NYSEs corporate governance listing
standards and an interim written affirmation to the NYSE as and
when required by the interim written affirmation form specified
by the NYSE.
James Hardie presently complies with the mandatory NYSE listing
standards and many of the non-compulsory standards including,
for example, the requirement that a majority of our directors
meet the independence requirements of the NYSE. In accordance
with Section 303A.11, we disclose in this report, and in
our annual report on
Form 20-F
that is filed with the SEC, any significant ways in which our
corporate governance practices differ from those followed by US
companies under the NYSE listing standards.
Two ways in which our corporate governance practices differ
significantly from those followed by US domestic companies under
NYSE listing standards should be noted:
|
|
|
In the US, an audit committee of a public company is required to
be directly responsible for appointing the companys
independent registered public accounting firm. Under Irish law,
the independent registered public accounting firm is appointed
by the shareholders where there is a new appointment, otherwise
the appointment is deemed to continue unless the firm retires,
is asked to retire or is unable to perform their duties; and
|
|
|
NYSE rules require each issuer to have an audit committee, a
compensation committee (equivalent to a remuneration committee)
and a nominating committee composed entirely of independent
directors. As a foreign private issuer, we do not have to comply
with this requirement. In our case, the Board Committee charters
reflect Australian and Irish practices, in that we have a
majority of independent directors on these committees, unless a
higher number is mandatory. Notwithstanding this difference, our
Board has determined that all of the current members of our
Audit Committee, Remuneration Committee and Nominating and
Governance Committee presently qualify as independent in
accordance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and the
NYSE.
|
TAKEOVER RULES
AND CONTROL OVER THE COMPANY
James Hardie is subject to Irish takeover laws. The Irish
Takeover Rules are built on several General Principles which are
set out below. Also, the takeover threshold is set at 30%,
meaning that a person (or persons acting in concert) who acquire
more than 30% of voting rights must make a mandatory cash bid
for all of the shares in the Company:
|
|
|
All holders of the securities of an offeree of the same class
must be afforded equivalent treatment; moreover, if a person
acquires control of a company, the other holders of securities
must be protected.
|
|
|
The holders of the securities of an offeree must have sufficient
time and information to enable them to reach a properly informed
decision on the offer; where it advises the holders of
securities, the board of the offeree must give its views on the
effects of implementation of the offer on employment,
considerations of employment and the locations of the
offerees places of business.
|
|
|
The board of an offeree must act in the interest of the company
as a whole and must not deny the holders of securities the
opportunity to decide on the merits of the offer.
|
|
|
False markets must not be created in the securities of the
offeree, of the offeror or of any other company concerned by the
offer in such a way that the rise or fall of the prices of the
securities becomes artificial and the normal functioning of the
markets is distorted.
|
|
|
An offeror must announce an offer only after ensuring that he or
she can pay in full any cash consideration, if such is offered,
and after taking all reasonable measures to secure the
implementation of any other type of consideration.
|
|
|
An offeree must not be hindered in the conduct of its affairs
for longer than is reasonable by any offer for its securities.
|
|
|
A substantial acquisition of securities (whether such
acquisition is to be effected by one transaction or a series of
transactions) shall take place only at an acceptable speed and
shall be subject to adequate and timely disclosure.
|
|
|
74
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
INDEX
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
75
|
THE
BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS OF JAMES HARDIE INDUSTRIES SE
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of
James Hardie Industries SE (formerly James Hardie
Industries N.V. and Subsidiaries) as of 31 March 2011
and 2010, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
changes in shareholders deficit, and cash flows for each
of the three years in the period ended 31 March 2011. These
financial statements are the responsibility of the
Companys management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a
test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in
the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial
statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated
financial position of James Hardie Industries SE at
31 March 2011 and 2010, and the consolidated results of its
operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the
period ended 31 March 2011 in conformity with
U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), James
Hardie Industries SEs internal control over financial
reporting as of 31 March 2011, based on criteria
established in Internal Control Integrated Framework
issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission and our report dated 19 May 2011
expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Orange County, California
19 May 2011
|
|
76
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CONSOLIDATED
BALANCE SHEETS
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
ASSETS
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Current assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
19.2
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents Asbestos
|
|
|
56.1
|
|
|
|
44.5
|
|
Restricted short-term investments Asbestos
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
13.3
|
|
Accounts and other receivables, net of allowance for doubtful
accounts
of $2.7 million and $2.3 million as of 31 March
2011 and 31 March 2010, respectively
|
|
|
138.1
|
|
|
|
155.0
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
161.5
|
|
|
|
149.1
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other current assets
|
|
|
31.6
|
|
|
|
25.6
|
|
Insurance receivable Asbestos
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
16.7
|
|
Workers compensation Asbestos
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
21.1
|
|
|
|
24.0
|
|
Deferred income taxes Asbestos
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
|
16.4
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
458.1
|
|
|
|
464.5
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
707.7
|
|
|
|
710.6
|
|
Insurance receivable Asbestos
|
|
|
188.6
|
|
|
|
185.1
|
|
Workers compensation Asbestos
|
|
|
90.4
|
|
|
|
98.8
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
27.3
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Deferred income taxes Asbestos
|
|
|
451.4
|
|
|
|
420.0
|
|
Deposit with Australian Taxation Office
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
247.2
|
|
Other assets
|
|
|
32.6
|
|
|
|
44.7
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
1,960.6
|
|
|
$
|
2,178.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES AND
SHAREHOLDERS DEFICIT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
106.4
|
|
|
$
|
100.9
|
|
Current portion of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
95.0
|
|
Accrued payroll and employee benefits
|
|
|
40.9
|
|
|
|
42.1
|
|
Accrued product warranties
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
Income taxes payable
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
34.9
|
|
Asbestos liability
|
|
|
111.1
|
|
|
|
106.7
|
|
Workers compensation Asbestos
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
53.8
|
|
|
|
27.7
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
322.5
|
|
|
|
414.1
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
108.1
|
|
|
|
113.5
|
|
Accrued product warranties
|
|
|
20.1
|
|
|
|
18.2
|
|
Asbestos liability
|
|
|
1,587.0
|
|
|
|
1,512.5
|
|
Workers compensation Asbestos
|
|
|
90.4
|
|
|
|
98.8
|
|
Australian Taxation Office amended assessment
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other liabilities
|
|
|
37.6
|
|
|
|
80.6
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
2,415.1
|
|
|
|
2,296.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 13)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shareholders deficit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, Euro 0.59 par value, 2.0 billion shares
authorised;
436,386,587 shares issued at 31 March 2011 and
434,524,879 shares issued at 31 March 2010
|
|
|
222.5
|
|
|
|
221.1
|
|
Additional paid-in capital
|
|
|
52.5
|
|
|
|
39.5
|
|
Accumulated deficit
|
|
|
(784.7
|
)
|
|
|
(437.7
|
)
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
|
55.2
|
|
|
|
59.2
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders deficit
|
|
|
(454.5
|
)
|
|
|
(117.9
|
)
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders deficit
|
|
$
|
1,960.6
|
|
|
$
|
2,178.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial statements
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
77
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS
OF OPERATIONS
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars, except per
share data)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
1,167.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,124.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,202.6
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(775.1
|
)
|
|
|
(708.5
|
)
|
|
|
(813.8
|
)
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
391.9
|
|
|
|
416.1
|
|
|
|
388.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
(173.4
|
)
|
|
|
(185.8
|
)
|
|
|
(208.8
|
)
|
Research and development expenses
|
|
|
(28.0
|
)
|
|
|
(27.1
|
)
|
|
|
(23.8
|
)
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
104.7
|
|
|
|
(21.0
|
)
|
|
|
173.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(9.0
|
)
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
|
|
(11.2
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
Other (expense) income
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
(14.8
|
)
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
96.6
|
|
|
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
|
155.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(443.6
|
)
|
|
|
(66.2
|
)
|
|
|
(19.5
|
)
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(347.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(84.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income per share basic
|
|
$
|
(0.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
Net (loss) income per share diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
Weighted average common shares outstanding (Millions):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
435.6
|
|
|
|
433.1
|
|
|
|
432.3
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
435.6
|
|
|
|
433.1
|
|
|
|
434.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial statements
|
|
78
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS
OF CASH FLOWS
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Operating Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income
|
|
$
|
(347.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
(84.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
136.3
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net (loss) income to net cash provided
by (used in) operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortisation
|
|
|
62.9
|
|
|
|
61.7
|
|
|
|
56.4
|
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(21.9
|
)
|
|
|
19.2
|
|
|
|
(58.2
|
)
|
Pension cost
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
Asbestos adjustments
|
|
|
85.8
|
|
|
|
224.2
|
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
Tax benefit from stock options exercised
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other-than-temporary
impairment on investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14.8
|
|
Changes in operating assets and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
63.3
|
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
|
|
69.0
|
|
Restricted short-term investments
|
|
|
9.7
|
|
|
|
54.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment to the AICF
|
|
|
(63.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(110.0
|
)
|
Accounts and other receivables
|
|
|
24.9
|
|
|
|
(30.1
|
)
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
(8.1
|
)
|
|
|
(12.2
|
)
|
|
|
40.3
|
|
Prepaid expenses and other assets
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
(48.1
|
)
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
Insurance receivable Asbestos
|
|
|
22.9
|
|
|
|
14.4
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(7.7
|
)
|
|
|
35.4
|
|
|
|
(11.4
|
)
|
Asbestos liability
|
|
|
(97.8
|
)
|
|
|
(91.0
|
)
|
|
|
(91.1
|
)
|
Deposit with Australian Taxation Office
|
|
|
254.3
|
|
|
|
(29.3
|
)
|
|
|
(9.9
|
)
|
ATO settlement payment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(101.6
|
)
|
Australian Taxation Office amended assessment
|
|
|
190.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
(37.1
|
)
|
|
|
47.6
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
$
|
147.2
|
|
|
$
|
183.1
|
|
|
$
|
(45.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Investing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
$
|
(50.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(50.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(26.1
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities
|
|
$
|
(49.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(50.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(26.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash Flows From Financing Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from short-term borrowings
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
128.8
|
|
Repayments of short-term borrowings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(93.3
|
)
|
|
|
(125.5
|
)
|
Proceeds from long-term borrowings
|
|
|
460.0
|
|
|
|
274.0
|
|
|
|
431.6
|
|
Repayments of long-term borrowings
|
|
|
(555.0
|
)
|
|
|
(350.7
|
)
|
|
|
(375.4
|
)
|
Proceeds from issuance of shares
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Tax benefit from stock options exercised
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34.6
|
)
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities
|
|
$
|
(89.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(159.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
25.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effects of exchange rate changes on cash
|
|
$
|
(8.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
3.2
|
|
|
$
|
53.3
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(23.2
|
)
|
|
|
7.0
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
|
19.2
|
|
|
|
42.4
|
|
|
|
35.4
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
19.2
|
|
|
$
|
42.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Components of Cash and Cash Equivalents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash at bank and on hand
|
|
$
|
9.5
|
|
|
$
|
13.1
|
|
|
$
|
8.9
|
|
Short-term deposits
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
33.5
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
19.2
|
|
|
$
|
42.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Disclosure of Cash Flow Activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash paid during the year for interest, net of amounts
capitalised
|
|
$
|
9.1
|
|
|
$
|
7.4
|
|
|
$
|
7.8
|
|
Cash paid during the year for income taxes, net
|
|
$
|
38.7
|
|
|
$
|
48.5
|
|
|
$
|
23.2
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial statements
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
79
|
CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF CHANGES
IN SHAREHOLDERS DEFICIT
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Paid-in
|
|
|
Accumulated
|
|
|
Treasury
|
|
|
Comprehensive
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
Deficit
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Income
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Balances as of 31 March 2008
|
|
$
|
219.7
|
|
|
$
|
19.3
|
|
|
$
|
(454.5
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
$
|
16.9
|
|
|
$
|
(202.6
|
)
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136.3
|
|
Pension and post-retirement benefit adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Unrealised gain on investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Foreign currency translation loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(19.8
|
)
|
|
|
(19.8
|
)
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14.7
|
)
|
|
|
(14.7
|
)
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
121.6
|
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
Tax benefit from stock options exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Equity awards exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(34.6
|
)
|
Treasury stock retired
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
(3.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balances as of 31 March 2009
|
|
$
|
219.2
|
|
|
$
|
22.7
|
|
|
$
|
(352.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2.2
|
|
|
$
|
(108.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(84.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(84.9
|
)
|
Pension and post-retirement benefit adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
Unrealised gain on investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Foreign currency translation gain
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
56.0
|
|
|
|
56.0
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57.0
|
|
|
|
57.0
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(27.9
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
Tax benefit from stock options exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
Equity awards exercised
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
8.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
|
|
Balances as of 31 March 2010
|
|
$
|
221.1
|
|
|
$
|
39.5
|
|
|
$
|
(437.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
59.2
|
|
|
$
|
(117.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(347.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(347.0
|
)
|
Pension and post-retirement benefit adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Unrealised gain on investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Foreign currency translation loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.6
|
)
|
|
|
(6.6
|
)
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(351.0
|
)
|
Stock-based compensation
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
Tax benefit from stock options exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
Equity awards exercised/released
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
Balances as of 31 March 2011
|
|
$
|
222.5
|
|
|
$
|
52.5
|
|
|
$
|
(784.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
55.2
|
|
|
$
|
(454.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an
integral part of these consolidated financial statements
|
|
80
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
1.
BACKGROUND AND BASIS OF PRESENTATION
Nature of
Operations
The Company manufactures and sells fibre cement building
products for interior and exterior building construction
applications primarily in the United States, Australia, New
Zealand, the Philippines and Europe.
Background
On 21 August 2009, James Hardie Industries N.V. (JHI
NV) shareholders approved a plan to transform the Company
into a Societas Europaea (SE) and, subsequently,
change its domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland. On
19 February 2010, the Company was transformed from a Dutch
NV company to a Dutch SE company, and on
17 June 2010, the Company changed its registered corporate
domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland and, in so doing,
became an Irish SE company. The Company became an
Irish tax resident on 29 June 2010 and operates under the
name of James Hardie Industries SE (JHI SE).
Basis of
Presentation
The consolidated financial statements represent the financial
position, results of operations and cash flows of JHI SE and its
wholly-owned subsidiaries and special purpose entity,
collectively referred to as either the Company or
James Hardie and JHI SE, together with
its subsidiaries as of the time relevant to the applicable
reference, the James Hardie Group, unless the
context indicates otherwise.
Upon shareholder approval of the Amended and Restated Final
Funding Agreement (as amended from time to time, the
AFFA) on 7 February 2007, the Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund (the AICF) was deemed a special
purpose entity and, as such, it was consolidated with the
results for JHI SE. See Note 2 and Note 11 for
additional information.
2.
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT
ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Reclassifications
Certain prior year balances have been reclassified to conform to
the current year presentation. The reclassifications do not
impact shareholders deficit.
Accounting
Principles
The consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America (US GAAP). The US dollar is used
as the reporting currency. All subsidiaries and qualifying
special purpose entities are consolidated and all significant
intercompany transactions and balances are eliminated.
Use of
Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with US
GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions.
These estimates and assumptions affect the reported amounts of
assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets
and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting
period. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Foreign Currency
Translation
All assets and liabilities are translated into US dollars at
current exchange rates while revenues and expenses are
translated at average exchange rates in effect for the period.
The effects of foreign currency translation adjustments are
included directly in other comprehensive income in
shareholders equity. Gains and losses arising from foreign
currency transactions are recognised in income currently.
Restricted Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Restricted cash and cash equivalents relate to amounts subject
to letters of credit with insurance companies which restrict the
cash from use for general corporate purposes.
Inventories
Inventories are valued at the lower of cost or market. Cost is
generally determined under the
first-in,
first-out method, except that the cost of raw materials and
supplies is determined using actual or average costs. Cost
includes the costs of materials, labour and applied factory
overhead. On a regular basis, the Company evaluates its
inventory balances for excess quantities and obsolescence by
analysing demand, inventory on hand, sales levels and other
information. Based on these evaluations, inventory costs are
written down, if necessary.
Property, Plant
and Equipment
Property, plant and equipment are stated at cost. Property,
plant and equipment of businesses acquired are recorded at their
estimated fair value at the date of acquisition. Depreciation of
property, plant and equipment is computed using the
straight-line method over the following estimated useful lives:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
40
|
|
Building improvements
|
|
|
5 to 10
|
|
Manufacturing machinery
|
|
|
20
|
|
General equipment
|
|
|
5 to 10
|
|
Computer equipment, software, and software development
|
|
|
3 to 7
|
|
Office furniture and equipment
|
|
|
3 to 10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of
Long-Lived Assets
Long-lived assets, such as property, plant and equipment, and
purchased intangibles subject to amortisation are reviewed for
impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate
that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable.
Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a
comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to estimated
undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the
asset. If the carrying amount of the asset exceeds its estimated
future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognised by the
amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the
fair value of the assets.
Environmental
Remediation and Compliance Expenditures
Environmental remediation and Compliance expenditures that
relate to current operations are expensed or capitalised, as
appropriate. Expenditures that relate to an existing condition
caused by past operations, and which do not contribute to
current or future revenue generation, are expensed. Liabilities
are recorded when environmental assessments
and/or
remedial efforts are probable and the costs can be reasonably
estimated. Estimated liabilities are not discounted to present
value. Generally, the timing of these accruals coincides with
completion of a feasibility study or the Companys
commitment to a formal plan of action.
Revenue
Recognition
The Company recognises revenue when the risks and obligations of
ownership have been transferred to the customer, which generally
occurs at the time of delivery to the customer. The Company
records estimated reductions in sales for customer rebates and
discounts including volume, promotional, cash and other
discounts. Rebates and discounts are recorded based on
managements best estimate when products are sold. The
estimates are based on historical experience for similar
programs and
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
81
|
products. Management reviews these
rebates and discounts on an ongoing basis and the related
accruals are adjusted, if necessary, as additional information
becomes available.
Depreciation and
Amortisation
The Company records depreciation and amortisation under both
cost of goods sold and selling, general and administrative
expenses, depending on the assets business use. All
depreciation and amortisation related to plant building,
machinery and equipment is recorded in cost of goods sold.
Advertising
The Company expenses the production costs of advertising the
first time the advertising takes place. Advertising expense was
US$7.9 million, US$9.1 million and US$9.9 million
during the years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009,
respectively.
Accrued Product
Warranties
An accrual for estimated future warranty costs is recorded based
on an analysis by the Company, which includes the historical
relationship of warranty costs to installed product.
Income
Taxes
The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and
liability method. Under this method, deferred income taxes are
recognised by applying enacted statutory rates applicable to
future years to differences between the tax bases and financial
reporting amounts of existing assets and liabilities. The effect
on deferred taxes of a change in tax rates is recognised in
income in the period that includes the enactment date. A
valuation allowance is provided when it is more likely than not
that all or some portion of deferred tax assets will not be
realised. Interest and penalties related to uncertain tax
positions are recognised in income tax expense.
Financial
Instruments
The Company calculates the fair value of financial instruments
and includes this additional information in the notes to the
consolidated financial statements when the fair value is
different from the carrying value of those financial
instruments. When the fair value reasonably approximates the
carrying value, no additional disclosure is made. The estimated
fair value amounts have been determined by the Company using
available market information and appropriate valuation
methodologies. However, considerable judgment is required in
interpreting market data to develop the estimates of fair value.
Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily
indicative of the amounts that the Company could realise in a
current market exchange. The use of different market assumptions
and/or
estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the
estimated fair value amounts.
Periodically, interest rate swaps, commodity swaps and forward
exchange contracts are used to manage market risks and reduce
exposure resulting from fluctuations in interest rates,
commodity prices and foreign currency exchange rates. Where such
contracts are designated as, and are effective as, a hedge,
changes in the fair value of derivative instruments designated
as cash flow hedges are deferred and recorded in other
comprehensive income. These deferred gains or losses are
recognised in income when the transactions being hedged are
recognised. The ineffective portion of these hedges is
recognised in income currently. Changes in the fair value of
derivative instruments designated as fair value hedges are
recognised in income, as are changes in the fair value of the
hedged item. Changes in the fair value of derivative instruments
that are not designated as hedges for accounting purposes are
recognised in income. The Company does not use derivatives for
trading purposes.
Stock-based
Compensation
The Company recognised stock-based compensation expense
(included in selling, general and administrative expense) of
US$11.3 million, US$9.3 million and
US$7.2 million for the years ended 31 March 2011, 2010
and 2009, respectively. Included in stock-based compensation
expense for the years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009 is
an expense of US$2.2 million, US$1.6 million and nil,
respectively, related to liability-classified awards.
Earnings Per
Share
The Company discloses basic and diluted earnings per share
(EPS). Basic EPS is calculated using net income
divided by the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding during the period. Diluted EPS is similar to basic
EPS except that the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding is increased to include the number of additional
common shares calculated using the Treasury Method that would
have been outstanding if the dilutive potential common shares,
such as options, had been issued.
Accordingly, basic and dilutive common shares outstanding used
in determining net (loss) income per share are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of shares)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Basic common shares outstanding
|
|
|
435.6
|
|
|
|
433.1
|
|
|
|
432.3
|
|
Dilutive effect of stock awards
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
Diluted common shares outstanding
|
|
|
435.6
|
|
|
|
433.1
|
|
|
|
434.5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
Net (loss) income per share
basic
|
|
$
|
(0.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.32
|
|
Net (loss) income per share diluted
|
|
$
|
(0.80
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.20
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
Potential common shares of 13.8 million, 13.7 million
and 19.0 million for the years ended 31 March 2011,
2010 and 2009, respectively, have been excluded from the
calculation of diluted common shares outstanding because the
effect of their inclusion would be anti-dilutive.
Unless they are anti-dilutive, restricted stock units
(RSUs) which vest solely based on continued
employment are considered to be outstanding as of their issuance
date for purposes of computing diluted EPS and are included in
the calculation of diluted EPS using the Treasury Method. Once
these RSUs vest, they are included in the basic EPS calculation
on a weighted-average basis.
RSUs which vest based on performance or market conditions are
considered contingent shares. At each reporting date prior to
the end of the contingency period, the Company determines the
number of contingently issuable shares to include in the diluted
EPS, as the number of shares that would be issuable under the
terms of the RSU arrangement, if the end of the reporting period
were the end of the contingency period. Once these RSUs vest,
they are included in the basic EPS calculation on a
weighted-average basis.
Asbestos
At 31 March 2006, the Company recorded an asbestos
provision based on the estimated economic impact of the Original
Final Funding Agreement (Original FFA) entered into
on 1 December 2005. The amount of the net asbestos
provision of US$715.6 million was based on
|
|
82
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
the terms of the Original FFA,
which included an actuarial estimate prepared by KPMG Actuaries
as of 31 March 2006 of the projected future cash outflows,
undiscounted and uninflated, and the anticipated tax deduction
arising from Australian legislation which came into force on
6 April 2006. The amount represented the net economic
impact that the Company was prepared to assume as a result of
its voluntary funding of the asbestos liability which was under
negotiation with various parties.
In February 2007, the shareholders approved the AFFA entered
into on 21 November 2006 to provide long-term funding to
AICF, a special purpose fund that provides compensation for
Australian-related personal injuries for which certain former
subsidiary companies of James Hardie in Australia (being Amaca
Pty Ltd (Amaca), Amaba Pty Ltd (Amaba)
and ABN 60 Pty Limited (ABN 60) (collectively, the
Former James Hardie Companies)) are found liable.
Amaca and Amaba separated from the James Hardie Group in
February 2001. ABN 60 separated from the James Hardie Group in
March 2003. Upon shareholder approval of the AFFA in February
2007, shares in the Former James Hardie Companies were
transferred to the AICF. The AICF manages Australian
asbestos-related personal injury claims made against the Former
James Hardie Companies and makes compensation payments in
respect of those proven claims.
AICF
In February 2007, the shareholders approved a proposal pursuant
to which the Company provides long-term funding to the AICF. The
Company owns 100% of James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd (the
Performing Subsidiary) that funds the AICF subject
to the provisions of the AFFA. The Company appoints three of the
AICF directors and the NSW Government appoints two of the AICF
directors.
Under the terms of the AFFA, the Performing Subsidiary has an
obligation to make payments to the AICF on an annual basis,
depending on the Companys net operating cash flow. The
amounts of these annual payments are dependent on several
factors, including the Companys free cash flow (as defined
in the AFFA), actuarial estimations, actual claims paid,
operating expenses of the AICF and the annual cash flow cap. JHI
SE guarantees the Performing Subsidiarys obligation. As a
result, the Company considers it to be the primary beneficiary
of the AICF.
The Companys interest in the AICF is considered variable
because the potential impact on the Company will vary based upon
the annual actuarial assessments obtained by the AICF with
respect to asbestos-related personal injury claims against the
Former James Hardie Companies.
Although the Company has no legal ownership in the AICF, for
financial reporting purposes, the Company consolidates the AICF
due to its pecuniary and contractual interests in the AICF as a
result of the funding arrangements outlined in the AFFA. The
Companys consolidation of the AICF resulted in a separate
recognition of the asbestos liability and certain other items
including the related Australian income tax benefit. Among other
items, the Company recorded a deferred tax asset for the
anticipated tax benefit related to asbestos liabilities and a
corresponding increase in the asbestos liability. As stated in
Deferred Income Taxes below, the Performing
Subsidiary is able to claim a tax deduction for contributions to
the asbestos fund. Since fiscal year 2007, the Company has
classified the expense related to the increase of the asbestos
liability as asbestos adjustments and the Company has classified
the benefit related to the recording of the related deferred tax
asset as an income tax benefit (expense) on its consolidated
statements of operations.
For the year ended 31 March 2011, the Company did not
provide financial or other support to the AICF that it was not
previously contractually required to provide. Future funding of
the AICF by the Company continues to be linked under the terms
of the AFFA to the Companys long-term financial success,
specifically the Companys ability to generate net
operating cash flow.
The AICF has operating costs that are claims related and
non-claims related. Claims related costs incurred by the AICF
are treated as reductions in the accrued asbestos liability
balances previously reflected in the consolidated balance
sheets. Non-claims related operating costs incurred by the AICF
are expensed as incurred in the line item Selling,
general and administrative expenses in the consolidated
statements of operations. The AICF earns interest on its cash
and cash equivalents and on its short-term investments; these
amounts are included in the line item Interest income
in the consolidated statements of operations.
See Asbestos-Related Assets and Liabilities below and
Note 11 for further details on the related assets and
liabilities recorded in the Companys consolidated balance
sheet under the terms of the AFFA.
Asbestos-Related
Assets and Liabilities
The Company has recorded on its consolidated balance sheets
certain assets and liabilities under the terms of the AFFA.
These items are Australian dollar-denominated and are subject to
translation into US dollars at each reporting date. These assets
and liabilities are referred to by the Company as
Asbestos-Related Assets and Liabilities and include:
Asbestos
Liability
The amount of the asbestos liability reflects the terms of the
AFFA, which has been calculated by reference to (but is not
exclusively based upon) the most recent actuarial estimate of
projected future cash flows prepared by KPMG Actuarial. Based on
their assumptions, they arrived at a range of possible total
cash flows and proposed a central estimate which is intended to
reflect an expected outcome. The Company views the central
estimate as the basis for recording the asbestos liability in
the Companys financial statements, which under US GAAP, it
considers the best estimate. The asbestos liability includes
these cash flows as undiscounted and uninflated on the basis
that it is inappropriate to discount or inflate future cash
flows when the timing and amounts of such cash flows are not
fixed or readily determinable.
Adjustments in the asbestos liability due to changes in the
actuarial estimate of projected future cash flows and changes in
the estimate of future operating costs of the AICF are reflected
in the consolidated statements of operations during the period
in which they occur. Claims paid by the AICF and claims-handling
costs incurred by the AICF are treated as reductions in the
accrued balances previously reflected in the consolidated
balance sheets.
Insurance
Receivable
There are various insurance policies and insurance companies
with exposure to the asbestos claims. The insurance receivable
determined by KPMG Actuarial reflects the recoveries expected
from all such policies based on the expected pattern of claims
against such policies less an allowance for credit risk based on
credit agency ratings. The insurance receivable generally
includes these cash flows as undiscounted and uninflated on the
basis that it is inappropriate to discount or inflate future
cash flows when the timing and amounts of such cash flows are
not fixed or readily determinable. The Company records insurance
receivables that are deemed probable of being realised.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
83
|
Included in insurance receivable is US$10.8 million
recorded on a discounted basis because the timing of the
recoveries has been agreed with the insurer.
Adjustments in insurance receivable due to changes in the
actuarial estimate, or changes in the Companys assessment
of recoverability are reflected in the consolidated statements
of operations during the period in which they occur. Insurance
recoveries are treated as a reduction in the insurance
receivable balance.
Workers
Compensation
Workers compensation claims are claims made by former
employees of the Former James Hardie Companies. Such past,
current and future reported claims were insured with various
insurance companies and the various Australian State-based
workers compensation schemes (collectively
workers compensation schemes or policies). An
estimate of the liability related to workers compensation
claims is prepared by KPMG Actuarial as part of the annual
actuarial assessment. This estimate contains two components,
amounts that will be met by a workers compensation scheme
or policy, and amounts that will be met by the Former James
Hardie Companies.
The portion of the estimate that is expected to be met by the
Former James Hardie Companies is included as part of the
Asbestos Liability. Adjustments to this estimate are
reflected in the consolidated statements of operations during
the period in which they occur.
The portion of the estimate that is expected to be met by the
workers compensation schemes or policies of the Former
James Hardie Companies is recorded by the Company as a
workers compensation liability. Since these amounts are
expected to be paid by the workers compensation schemes or
policies, the Company records an equivalent workers
compensation receivable.
Adjustments to the workers compensation liability result
in an equal adjustment in the workers compensation
receivable recorded by the Company and have no effect on the
consolidated statements of operations.
Asbestos-Related
Research and Education Contributions
The Company agreed to fund asbestos-related research and
education initiatives for a period of 10 years, beginning
in fiscal year 2007. The liabilities related to these agreements
are included in Other Liabilities on the
consolidated balance sheets.
Restricted Cash
and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents of the AICF are reflected as
restricted assets, as the use of these assets is restricted to
the settlement of asbestos claims and payment of the operating
costs of the AICF. The Company classifies these amounts as a
current asset on the face of the consolidated balance sheet
since they are highly liquid.
Restricted
Short-Term Investments
Short-term investments consist of highly liquid investments held
in the custody of major financial institutions. All short-term
investments are classified as available for sale and are
recorded at market value using the specific identification
method. Unrealised gains and losses on the market value of these
investments are included as a separate component of accumulated
other comprehensive income. Realised gains and losses on
short-term investments are recognised in Other Income on
the consolidated statement of operations.
AICF
Other Assets and Liabilities
Other assets and liabilities of the AICF, including fixed
assets, trade receivables and payables are included on the
consolidated balance sheets under the appropriate captions and
their use is restricted to the operations of the AICF.
Deferred Income
Taxes
The Performing Subsidiary is able to claim a tax deduction for
its contributions to the AICF over a five-year period from the
date of contribution. Consequently, a deferred tax asset has
been recognised equivalent to the anticipated tax benefit over
the life of the AFFA. The current portion of the deferred tax
asset represents Australian tax benefits that will be available
to the Company during the subsequent twelve months.
Adjustments are made to the deferred income tax asset as
adjustments to the asbestos-related assets and liabilities are
recorded.
Foreign Currency
Translation
The asbestos-related assets and liabilities are denominated in
Australian dollars and thus the reported values of these
asbestos-related assets and liabilities in the Companys
consolidated balance sheets in US dollars are subject to
adjustment depending on the closing exchange rate between the
two currencies at the balance sheet date. The effect of foreign
exchange rate movements between these currencies is included in
Asbestos Adjustments in the consolidated statements of
operations.
Recent Accounting
Pronouncements
In January 2010, the FASB issued ASU
No. 2010-06,
which requires new fair value disclosures pertaining to
significant transfers in and out of Level 1 and
Level 2 fair value measurements and the reasons for the
transfers and activity. For Level 3 fair value
measurements, purchases, sales, issuances and settlements must
be reported on a gross basis. Further, additional disclosures
are required by class of assets or liabilities, as well as
inputs used to measure fair value and valuation techniques. ASU
No. 2010-06
is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning
after 15 December 2009, except for the disclosures about
purchases, sales, issuances and settlements on a gross basis,
which is effective for fiscal years beginning after
15 December 2010. The adoption of the effective portions of
this ASU did not result in a material impact on the
Companys consolidated financial position, results of
operations or cash flows. The Company does not anticipate that
the adoption of the remaining portions of this ASU will result
in a material impact to its reported consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
In April 2010, the FASB issued ASU
No. 2010-13,
which provides additional guidance concerning the classification
of an employee share-based payment award with an exercise price
denominated in the currency of a market in which the underlying
equity security trades. This update clarifies that an employee
share-based payment award with an exercise price denominated in
the currency of a market in which a substantial portion of the
entitys equity securities trades should not be considered
to contain a condition that is not a market, performance or
service condition. Therefore, an entity would not classify such
an award as a liability if it otherwise qualifies as equity. The
amendments included in this update do not expand the recurring
disclosure requirements already in effect. The amendments in
this update are effective for fiscal years and interim periods
beginning on or after 15 December 2010. The adoption of
this ASU did not result in a material impact on the
Companys reported consolidated financial position, results
of operations or cash flows.
|
|
84
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
3.
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
Cash and cash equivalents include amounts on deposit in banks
and cash invested temporarily in various highly liquid financial
instruments with original maturities of three months or less
when acquired.
Cash and cash equivalents consist of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Cash at bank and on hand
|
|
$
|
9.5
|
|
|
$
|
13.1
|
|
Short-term deposits
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
Total cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
19.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.
RESTRICTED CASH
Included in restricted cash and cash equivalents is
US$5.3 million related to an insurance policy at
31 March 2011 and 2010, which restricts the cash from use
for general corporate purposes.
5.
ACCOUNTS AND OTHER RECEIVABLES
Accounts and other receivables consist of the following
components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Trade receivables
|
|
$
|
118.3
|
|
|
$
|
122.8
|
|
Other receivables and advances
|
|
|
22.5
|
|
|
|
34.5
|
|
Allowance for doubtful accounts
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
|
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
|
Total accounts and other receivables
|
|
$
|
138.1
|
|
|
$
|
155.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The collectability of accounts receivable, consisting mainly of
trade receivables, is reviewed on an ongoing basis. An allowance
for doubtful accounts is provided for known and estimated bad
debts by analysing specific customer accounts and assessing the
risk of uncollectability based on insolvency, disputes or other
collection issues.
The following are changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
$
|
1.4
|
|
Charged to expense
|
|
|
0.4
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$
|
2.7
|
|
|
$
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.
INVENTORIES
Inventories consist of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Finished goods
|
|
$
|
104.5
|
|
|
$
|
99.8
|
|
Work-in-process
|
|
|
5.9
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Raw materials and supplies
|
|
|
57.3
|
|
|
|
52.0
|
|
Provision for obsolete finished goods and raw materials
|
|
|
(6.2
|
)
|
|
|
(7.5
|
)
|
|
|
Total inventories
|
|
$
|
161.5
|
|
|
$
|
149.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
85
|
7.
PROPERTY, PLANT AND EQUIPMENT
Property, plant and equipment consist of the following
components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Machinery
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Land
|
|
|
Buildings
|
|
|
Equipment
|
|
|
In
Progress1
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
18.0
|
|
|
|
201.6
|
|
|
|
826.2
|
|
|
|
51.6
|
|
|
|
1,097.4
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47.3
|
)
|
|
|
(349.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(396.6
|
)
|
|
|
Net book value
|
|
$
|
18.0
|
|
|
$
|
154.3
|
|
|
$
|
476.9
|
|
|
$
|
51.6
|
|
|
$
|
700.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in net book value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
30.0
|
|
|
|
16.8
|
|
|
|
50.5
|
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.7
|
)
|
|
|
(52.0
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(61.7
|
)
|
Other movements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20.7
|
|
|
|
(20.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
21.0
|
|
|
|
Total changes
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
(6.1
|
)
|
|
|
19.7
|
|
|
|
(3.9
|
)
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
$
|
18.1
|
|
|
$
|
205.2
|
|
|
$
|
897.9
|
|
|
$
|
47.7
|
|
|
$
|
1,168.9
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(57.0
|
)
|
|
|
(401.3
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(458.3
|
)
|
|
|
Net book value
|
|
|
18.1
|
|
|
|
148.2
|
|
|
|
496.6
|
|
|
|
47.7
|
|
|
|
710.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in net book value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital expenditures
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
58.9
|
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)
|
|
|
50.3
|
|
Retirements and sales
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.7
|
)
|
Depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(9.5
|
)
|
|
|
(53.4
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(62.9
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
|
|
Total changes
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
(5.1
|
)
|
|
|
15.2
|
|
|
|
(13.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost
|
|
|
18.3
|
|
|
|
209.6
|
|
|
|
966.5
|
|
|
|
34.5
|
|
|
|
1,228.9
|
|
Accumulated depreciation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(66.5
|
)
|
|
|
(454.7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(521.2
|
)
|
|
|
Net book value
|
|
$
|
18.3
|
|
|
$
|
143.1
|
|
|
$
|
511.8
|
|
|
$
|
34.5
|
|
|
$
|
707.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Construction in progress consists
of plant expansions and upgrades.
|
|
|
86
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
Depreciation expense for the year ended 31 March 2011 was
US$62.9 million. Included in property, plant and equipment
are restricted assets of the AICF with a net book value of
US$2.4 million and US$2.3 million as of 31 March
2011 and 2010.
8.
ACCOUNTS PAYABLE AND ACCRUED LIABILITIES
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities consist of the
following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Trade creditors
|
|
$
|
57.7
|
|
|
$
|
71.3
|
|
Other creditors and accruals
|
|
|
48.7
|
|
|
|
29.6
|
|
Total accounts payable and accrued liabilities
|
|
$
|
106.4
|
|
|
$
|
100.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.
LONG-TERM DEBT
At 31 March 2011, the Companys credit facilities
consisted of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
Description
|
|
Interest Rate
|
|
|
Facility
|
|
|
Drawn
|
|
|
|
(US$ millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
September 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
50.0
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
December 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
130.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
February 2013
|
|
|
1.02
|
%
|
|
|
90.0
|
|
|
|
59.0
|
|
Term facilities, can be drawn in US$, variable interest rates
based on LIBOR plus margin, can be repaid and redrawn until
February 2014
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
320.0
|
|
|
$
|
59.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted average fixed interest rate on the Companys
interest rate swap contracts is set forth in Note 12. The
weighted average interest rate on the Companys total debt
was 1.02% and 0.92% at 31 March 2011 and 2010,
respectively, and the weighted average term of all debt
facilities is 1.9 years at 31 March 2011.
On 16 June 2010, US$161.7 million of the
Companys term facilities matured, which included
US$95.0 million of term facilities that were outstanding at
31 March 2010. The Company did not refinance these
facilities. Accordingly, amounts outstanding under these
facilities were repaid by using longer-term facilities.
The Company replaced term facilities in the amount of
US$45.0 million that matured in February 2011 with new term
facilities totaling US$100.0 million. These facilities
became available to the Company in February 2011.
US$50.0 million of these facilities mature in September
2012 and US$50.0 million of these facilities mature in
February 2014. At 31 March 2011, no amounts were
outstanding under these new term facilities.
For all facilities, the interest rate is calculated two business
days prior to the commencement of each draw-down period based on
the US$ London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus
the margins of individual lenders and is payable at the end of
each draw-down period. At 31 March 2011, there was
US$59.0 million drawn under the combined facilities and
US$261.0 million was unutilised and available.
At 31 March 2011, the Company was in compliance with all
restrictive debt covenants contained in its credit facility
agreements. Under the most restrictive of these covenants, the
Company (i) is required to maintain certain ratios of
indebtedness to equity which do not exceed certain maximums,
excluding assets, liabilities and other balance sheet items of
the AICF, Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew Mining Pty Limited,
(ii) must maintain a minimum level of net worth, excluding
assets, liabilities and other balance sheet items of the AICF;
for these purposes net worth means the sum of the
par value (or value stated in the books of the James Hardie
Group) of the capital stock (but excluding treasury stock and
capital stock subscribed or unissued) of the James Hardie Group,
the paid in capital and retained earnings of the James Hardie
Group and the aggregate amount of provisions made by the James
Hardie Group for asbestos related liabilities, in each case, as
such amounts would be shown in the consolidated balance sheet of
the James Hardie Group if Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew Mining
Pty Limited were not accounted for as subsidiaries of the
Company, (iii) must meet or exceed a minimum ratio of
earnings before interest and taxes to net interest charges,
excluding all income, expense and other profit and loss
statement impacts of the AICF, Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew
Mining Pty Limited, and (iv) must ensure that no more than
35% of Free Cash Flow (as defined in the AFFA) in any given
Financial Year is contributed to the AICF on the payment dates
under the AFFA in the next following Financial Year. The limit
does not apply to payments of interest to the AICF. Such limits
are consistent with the contractual liabilities of the
Performing Subsidiary and the Company under the AFFA.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
87
|
10.
PRODUCT WARRANTIES
The Company offers various warranties on its products, including
a 30-year
limited warranty on certain of its fibre cement siding products
in the United States. A typical warranty program requires the
Company to replace defective products within a specified time
period from the date of sale. The Company records an estimate
for future warranty related costs based on a trend analysis of
actual historical warranty costs as they relate to sales. Based
on this analysis and other factors, the adequacy of the
Companys warranty provisions is adjusted as necessary.
While the Companys warranty costs have historically been
within its calculated estimates, it is possible that future
warranty costs could differ from those estimates.
Additionally, the Company includes in its accrual for product
warranties amounts for a Class Action Settlement Agreement
(the Settlement Agreement) related to its previous
roofing products, which are no longer manufactured in the United
States. On 14 February 2002, the Company signed the
Settlement Agreement for all product, warranty and property
related liability claims associated with these previously
manufactured roofing products. These products were removed from
the marketplace between 1995 and 1998 in areas where there had
been any alleged problems. The total amount included in the
product warranty provision relating to the Settlement Agreement
is US$0.9 million and US$1.2 million as of
31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The following are the changes in the product warranty provision:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
24.9
|
|
|
$
|
24.9
|
|
|
|
17.7
|
|
Accruals for product warranties
|
|
|
9.1
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
14.6
|
|
Settlements made in cash or in kind
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
|
|
(7.1
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
|
$
|
26.2
|
|
|
$
|
24.9
|
|
|
$
|
24.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
88
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
The AFFA was approved by shareholders in February 2007 to
provide long-term funding to the AICF. The accounting policies
utilised by the Company to account for the AFFA are described in
Note 2.
Asbestos
Adjustments
The asbestos adjustments included in the consolidated statements
of operations comprise the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Change in estimates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in actuarial estimate asbestos liability
|
|
$
|
9.8
|
|
|
$
|
(3.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(180.9
|
)
|
Change in actuarial estimate insurance receivable
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
19.8
|
|
Change in estimate AICF claims-handling costs
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.2
|
)
|
|
|
Subtotal Change in estimates
|
|
|
21.5
|
|
|
|
(3.3
|
)
|
|
|
(162.3
|
)
|
(Loss) gain on foreign currency exchange
|
|
|
(107.3
|
)
|
|
|
(220.9
|
)
|
|
|
179.7
|
|
|
|
Total Asbestos Adjustments
|
|
$
|
(85.8
|
)
|
|
$
|
(224.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
17.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos-Related
Assets and Liabilities
Under the terms of the AFFA, the Company has included on its
consolidated balance sheets certain asbestos-related assets and
liabilities. These amounts are detailed in the table below, and
the net total of these asbestos-related assets and liabilities
is referred to by the Company as the Net AFFA
Liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Asbestos liability current
|
|
$
|
(111.1
|
)
|
|
$
|
(106.7
|
)
|
Asbestos liability non-current
|
|
|
(1,587.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1,512.5
|
)
|
|
|
Asbestos liability Total
|
|
|
(1,698.1
|
)
|
|
|
(1,619.2
|
)
|
Insurance receivable current
|
|
|
13.7
|
|
|
|
16.7
|
|
Insurance receivable non-current
|
|
|
188.6
|
|
|
|
185.1
|
|
|
|
Insurance receivable Total
|
|
|
202.3
|
|
|
|
201.8
|
|
Workers compensation asset current
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Workers compensation asset non-current
|
|
|
90.4
|
|
|
|
98.8
|
|
Workers compensation liability current
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Workers compensation liability non-current
|
|
|
(90.4
|
)
|
|
|
(98.8
|
)
|
|
|
Workers compensation Total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes current
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
|
|
16.4
|
|
Deferred income taxes non-current
|
|
|
451.4
|
|
|
|
420.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes Total
|
|
|
461.9
|
|
|
|
436.4
|
|
Income tax payable
|
|
|
18.6
|
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
Other net liabilities
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
Net Amended FFA liability
|
|
|
(1,016.6
|
)
|
|
|
(966.2
|
)
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents and restricted short-term
investment assets of the AICF
|
|
|
61.9
|
|
|
|
57.8
|
|
|
|
Unfunded Net Amended FFA liability
|
|
$
|
(954.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(908.4
|
)
|
|
|
On 1 July 2010, the Company contributed
US$63.7 million to the AICF in accordance with the terms of
the AFFA.
Asbestos
Liability
The amount of the asbestos liability reflects the terms of the
AFFA, which has been calculated by reference to (but is not
exclusively based upon) the most recent actuarial estimate of
the projected future asbestos-related cash flows prepared by
KPMG Actuarial. The asbestos liability also includes an
allowance
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
89
|
for the future claims-handling
costs of the AICF. The Company receives an updated actuarial
estimate as of 31 March each year. The last actuarial
assessment was performed as of 31 March 2011.
The changes in the asbestos liability for the year ended
31 March 2011 are detailed in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$
|
|
|
A$ to US$
|
|
|
US$
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
rate
|
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
Asbestos liability 31 March 2010
|
|
|
(1,768.0
|
)
|
|
|
1.0919
|
|
|
|
(1,619.2
|
)
|
Asbestos claims
paid1
|
|
|
100.6
|
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
95.0
|
|
AICF claims-handling costs
incurred1
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
Change in actuarial
estimate2
|
|
|
9.5
|
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
Change in estimate of AICF claims-handling
costs2
|
|
|
11.8
|
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
12.2
|
|
Loss on foreign currency exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(198.7
|
)
|
|
|
Asbestos liability 31 March 2011
|
|
|
(1,643.1
|
)
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
(1,698.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance
Receivable Asbestos
The changes in the insurance receivable for the year ended
31 March 2011 are detailed in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$
|
|
|
A$ to US$
|
|
|
US$
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
rate
|
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance receivable 31 March 2010
|
|
|
220.3
|
|
|
|
1.0919
|
|
|
|
201.8
|
|
Insurance
recoveries1
|
|
|
(24.1
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(22.9
|
)
|
Change in actuarial
estimate2
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
(0.5
|
)
|
Gain on foreign currency exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
Insurance receivable 31 March 2011
|
|
|
195.7
|
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
202.3
|
|
|
|
Deferred Income
Taxes Asbestos
The changes in the deferred income taxes asbestos
for the year ended 31 March 2011 are detailed in the table
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$
|
|
|
A$ to US$
|
|
|
US$
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
rate
|
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets 31 March 2010
|
|
|
476.5
|
|
|
|
1.0919
|
|
|
|
436.4
|
|
Amounts offset against income tax
payable1
|
|
|
(22.3
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(21.1
|
)
|
AICF
earnings1
|
|
|
(7.3
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(6.9
|
)
|
Gain on foreign currency exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53.5
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets 31 March 2011
|
|
|
446.9
|
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
461.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
The average exchange rate for the
period is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to US
dollars based on the assumption that these transactions occurred
evenly throughout the period.
|
|
2 |
|
The spot exchange rate at
31 March 2011 is used to convert the Australian dollar
amount to US dollars as the adjustment to the estimate was made
on that date.
|
Income Taxes
Payable
A portion of the deferred income tax asset is applied against
the Companys income tax payable. At 31 March 2011 and
2010, this amount was US$21.1 million and
US$15.3 million, respectively. During the year ended
31 March 2011, there was a US$2.1 million unfavourable
effect of foreign currency exchange.
Other Net
Liabilities
Other net liabilities include a provision for asbestos-related
education and medical research contributions of
US$2.5 million and US$2.6 million at 31 March
2011 and 2010, respectively. Also included in other net
liabilities are the other assets and liabilities of the AICF
including trade receivables, prepayments, fixed assets, trade
payables and accruals.
These other assets and liabilities of the AICF were a net asset
of US$1.3 million and US$0.9 million at 31 March
2011 and 2010, respectively. During the year ended 31 March
2011, there was a US$0.1 million net favourable effect of
foreign currency exchange on these other assets and liabilities.
|
|
90
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
Restricted Cash
and Short-term Investments of the AICF
Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments of the AICF
are reflected as restricted assets as these assets are
restricted for use in the settlement of asbestos claims and
payment of the operating costs of the AICF.
At 31 March 2011, the Company revalued the AICFs
short-term investments
available-for-sale
resulting in a positive
mark-to-market
fair value adjustment of US$1.3 million. This appreciation
in the value of the investments was recorded as an unrealised
gain in Other Comprehensive Income.
The changes in the restricted cash and short-term investments of
the AICF for the year ended 31 March 2011 are detailed in
the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$
|
|
|
A$ to US$
|
|
|
US$
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
rate
|
|
|
Millions
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents and restricted short-term
investments 31 March 2010
|
|
|
63.1
|
|
|
|
1.0919
|
|
|
|
57.8
|
|
Asbestos claims
paid1
|
|
|
(100.6
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(95.0
|
)
|
Payments received in accordance with
AFFA2
|
|
|
72.8
|
|
|
|
1.1430
|
|
|
|
63.7
|
|
AICF operating costs paid
claims-handling1
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(2.8
|
)
|
AICF operating costs paid non
claims-handling1
|
|
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
Insurance
recoveries1
|
|
|
24.1
|
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
22.9
|
|
Interest and investment
income1
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Unrealised gain on
investments1
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Other1
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
1.0584
|
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Gain on foreign currency exchange
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.0
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents and restricted
short-term investments 31 March 2011
|
|
|
59.9
|
|
|
|
0.9676
|
|
|
|
61.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
The average exchange rate for the
period is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to US
dollars based on the assumption that these transactions occurred
evenly throughout the period.
|
|
2 |
|
The spot exchange rate on the date
of payment is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to US
dollars.
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
91
|
Actuarial Study;
Claims Estimate
The AICF commissioned an updated actuarial study of potential
asbestos-related liabilities as of 31 March 2011. Based on
KPMG Actuarials assumptions, KPMG Actuarial arrived at a
range of possible total cash flows and proposed a central
estimate which is intended to reflect an expected outcome. The
Company views the central estimate as the basis for recording
the asbestos liability in the Companys financial
statements, which under US GAAP, it considers the best estimate.
Based on the results of these studies, it is estimated that the
discounted (but inflated) value of the central estimate for
claims against the Former James Hardie Companies was
approximately A$1.5 billion (US$1.5 billion). The
undiscounted (but inflated) value of the central estimate of the
asbestos-related liabilities of Amaca and Amaba as determined by
KPMG Actuarial was approximately A$2.7 billion
(US$2.8 billion). Actual liabilities of those companies for
such claims could vary, perhaps materially, from the central
estimate described above. The asbestos liability includes
projected future cash flows as undiscounted and uninflated on
the basis that it is inappropriate to discount or inflate future
cash flows when the timing and amounts of such cash flows is not
fixed or readily determinable.
The asbestos liability has been revised to reflect the most
recent actuarial estimate prepared by KPMG Actuarial as of
31 March 2011 and to adjust for payments made to claimants
during the year then ended.
In estimating the potential financial exposure, KPMG Actuarial
made assumptions related to the total number of claims which
were reasonably estimated to be asserted through 2074, the
typical cost of settlement (which is sensitive to, among other
factors, the industry in which a plaintiff claims exposure, the
alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is
brought), the legal costs incurred in the litigation of such
claims, the rate of receipt of claims, the settlement strategy
in dealing with outstanding claims and the timing of settlements.
Due to inherent uncertainties in the legal and medical
environment, the number and timing of future claim notifications
and settlements, the recoverability of claims against insurance
contracts, and estimates of future trends in average claim
awards, as well as the extent to which the above named entities
will contribute to the overall settlements, the actual amount of
liability could differ materially from that which is currently
projected.
The potential range of costs as estimated by KPMG Actuarial is
affected by a number of variables such as nil settlement rates
(where no settlement is payable by the Former James Hardie
Companies because the claim settlement is borne by other
asbestos defendants (other than the former James Hardie
subsidiaries) which are held liable), peak year of claims, past
history of claims numbers, average settlement rates, past
history of Australian asbestos-related medical injuries, current
number of claims, average defence and plaintiff legal costs,
base wage inflation and superimposed inflation. The potential
range of losses disclosed includes both asserted and unasserted
claims. While no assurances can be provided, the Company
believes that it is likely to be able to partially recover
losses from various insurance carriers. As of 31 March
2011, KPMG Actuarials undiscounted (but inflated) central
estimate of asbestos-related liabilities was A$2.7 billion
(US$2.8 billion). This undiscounted (but inflated) central
estimate is net of expected insurance recoveries of
A$388.1 million (US$401.1 million) after making a
general credit risk allowance for insurance carriers for
A$58.6 million (US$60.6 million) and an allowance for
A$56.3 million (US$58.2 million) of by
claim or subrogation recoveries from other third parties.
The Company has not netted the insurance receivable against the
asbestos liability on its consolidated balance sheets.
A sensitivity analysis has been performed to determine how the
actuarial estimates would change if certain assumptions (i.e.,
the rate of inflation and superimposed inflation, the average
costs of claims and legal fees, and the projected numbers of
claims) were different from the assumptions used to determine
the central estimates. This analysis shows that the discounted
(but inflated) central estimates could be in a range of
A$1.0 billion (US$1.0 billion) to A$2.3 billion
(US$2.4 billion). The undiscounted (but inflated) estimates
could be in a range of A$1.7 billion (US$1.8 billion)
to A$4.6 billion (US$4.8 billion) as of 31 March
2011. The actual cost of the liabilities could be outside of
that range depending on the results of actual experience
relative to the assumptions made. One of the critical
assumptions is the estimated peak year of mesothelioma disease
claims which is targeted for 2010/2011. Potential variation in
this estimate has an impact much greater than the other
sensitivities. If the peak year occurs five years later, in
2015/2016, the discounted central estimate could increase by
approximately 50%.
Claims
Data
The AICF provides compensation payments for Australian
asbestos-related personal injury claims against the Former James
Hardie Companies. The claims data in this section are reflective
of these Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims
against the Former James Hardie Companies.
|
|
92
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
The following table shows the activity related to the numbers of
open claims, new claims and closed claims during each of the
past five years and the average settlement per settled claim and
case closed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended 31 March
|
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
|
|
Number of open claims at beginning of period
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
534
|
|
|
|
523
|
|
|
|
490
|
|
|
|
564
|
|
Number of new claims
|
|
|
494
|
|
|
|
535
|
|
|
|
607
|
|
|
|
552
|
|
|
|
463
|
|
Number of closed claims
|
|
|
459
|
|
|
|
540
|
|
|
|
596
|
|
|
|
519
|
|
|
|
537
|
|
Number of open claims at end of period
|
|
|
564
|
|
|
|
529
|
|
|
|
534
|
|
|
|
523
|
|
|
|
490
|
|
Average settlement amount per settled claim
|
|
A$
|
204,366
|
|
|
A$
|
190,627
|
|
|
A$
|
190,638
|
|
|
A$
|
147,349
|
|
|
A$
|
166,164
|
|
Average settlement amount per case closed
|
|
A$
|
173,199
|
|
|
A$
|
171,917
|
|
|
A$
|
168,248
|
|
|
A$
|
126,340
|
|
|
A$
|
128,723
|
|
Average settlement amount per settled claim
|
|
US$
|
193,090
|
|
|
US$
|
162,250
|
|
|
US$
|
151,300
|
|
|
US$
|
128,096
|
|
|
US$
|
127,163
|
|
Average settlement amount per case closed
|
|
US$
|
163,642
|
|
|
US$
|
146,325
|
|
|
US$
|
133,530
|
|
|
US$
|
109,832
|
|
|
US$
|
98,510
|
|
|
|
Under the terms of the AFFA, the Company has obtained rights of
access to actuarial information produced for the AICF by the
actuary appointed by the AICF (the Approved
Actuary). The Companys future disclosures with
respect to claims statistics are subject to it obtaining such
information from the Approved Actuary. The Company has had no
general right (and has not obtained any right under the AFFA) to
audit or otherwise require independent verification of such
information or the methodologies to be adopted by the Approved
Actuary. As such, the Company will need to rely on the accuracy
and completeness of the information and analysis of the Approved
Actuary when making future disclosures with respect to claims
statistics.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
93
|
AICF
NSW Government Secured Loan Facility
On 9 December 2010, the AICF, Amaca, Amaba and ABN 60
(together, the Obligors) entered into a secured
standby loan facility and related agreements (the
Facility) with The State of New South Wales,
Australia (NSW) whereby the AICF may borrow, subject
to certain conditions, up to an aggregate amount of
A$320.0 million (US$330.7 million, based on the
exchange rate at 31 March 2011).
The amount available to be drawn depends on the value of the
insurance policies benefiting the Obligors and may be adjusted
upward or downward, subject to a ceiling of
A$320.0 million. At 31 March 2011, the discounted
value of insurance policies was A$177.3 million
(US$183.2 million, based on the exchange rate at
31 March 2011).
In accordance with the terms of the Facility, drawings under the
Facility may only be used by the AICF to fund the payment of
asbestos claims and certain operating and legal costs of the
Obligors. The amount available to be drawn is subject to
periodic review by NSW. The Facility is available to be drawn up
to the tenth anniversary of signing and must be repaid on or by
1 November 2030.
Interest accrues daily on amounts outstanding. Interest is
calculated based on a
365-day year
and is payable monthly. The AICF may, at its discretion, elect
to capitalise interest payable on amounts outstanding under the
Facility on the date interest becomes due and payable. In
addition, if the AICF does not pay interest on a due date, it is
taken to have elected to capitalise the interest.
NSW will borrow up to 50% of the amount made available under the
Facility from the Commonwealth of Australia
(Commonwealth).
To the extent that NSWs source of funding the Facility is
from the Commonwealth, the interest rate on the Facility is
calculated by reference to the cost of NSWs borrowings
from the Commonwealth for that purpose, being calculated with
reference to the Commonwealth Treasury fixed coupon bond rate
for a period determined as appropriate by the Commonwealth.
In summary, to the extent that NSWs source of funding is
not from the Commonwealth, the interest rate on drawings under
the Facility is calculated as (i) during the period to (but
excluding) 1 May 2020, a yield percent per annum calculated
at the time of the first drawdown of the Facility by reference
to the NSW Treasury Corporations 6%
1/05/2020
Benchmark Bonds, (ii) during the period after 1 May
2020, a yield percent per annum calculated by reference to NSW
Treasury Corporation bonds on issue at that time and maturing in
2030, or (iii) in any case, if the relevant bonds are not
on issue, a yield percent per annum in respect of such other
source of funding for the Facility determined by the NSW
Government in good faith to be used to replace those bonds,
including any guarantee fee payable to the Commonwealth in
respect of the bonds (where the bonds are guaranteed by the
Commonwealth) or other source of funding.
Under the Facility, Amaca, Amaba and ABN 60 each guarantee the
payment of amounts owed by the AICF and the AICFs
performance of its obligations under the Facility. Each Obligor
has granted a security interest in certain property including
cash accounts, proceeds from insurance claims, payments remitted
by the Company to the AICF and contractual rights under certain
documents including the AFFA. Each Obligor may not deal with the
secured property until all amounts outstanding under the
Facility are paid, except as permitted under the terms of the
security interest.
Under the terms of the Facility, each Obligor must, upon receipt
of proceeds from insurance claims and payments remitted by the
Company under the AFFA, apply all of such proceeds in repayment
of amounts owing under the Facility. NSW may, at its sole
discretion, waive or postpone (in such manner and for such
period as it determines) the requirement for the Obligors to
apply proceeds of insurance claims and payments remitted by the
Company to repay amounts owed under the Facility to ensure the
AICF has sufficient liquidity to meet its future cash flow needs.
The Obligors are subject to certain operating covenants under
the Facility and the terms of the security interest, including,
without limitation, (i) positive covenants relating to
providing corporate reporting documents, providing particular
notifications and complying with the terms of the AFFA, and
(ii) negative covenants restricting them from voiding,
canceling, settling, or adversely affecting existing insurance
policies, disposing of assets and granting security to secure
any other financial indebtedness, other than in accordance with
the terms and conditions of the Facility.
Upon an event of default, NSW may cancel the commitment and
declare all amounts outstanding as immediately due and payable.
The events of default include, without limitation, failure to
pay or repay amounts due in accordance with the Facility, breach
of covenants, misrepresentation, cross default by an obligor and
an adverse judgment (other than a personal asbestos or Marlew
claim) against an Obligor.
The term of the Facility expires on 1 November 2030. At
that time, all amounts outstanding under the Facility become due
and payable. As of 19 May 2011, all substantive conditions
precedent to drawdown of the facility have been satisfied with
only procedural matters remaining. There are no amounts
outstanding under the Facility. Further, from the time of
signing through 19 May 2011, there have not been any
drawings on the Facility by the Obligors.
Any drawings, repayments, or payments of accrued interest under
the Facility by the AICF do not impact the Companys net
operating cash flow, as defined in the AFFA, on which annual
contributions remitted by the Company to the AICF are based.
James Hardie Industries SE and its wholly-owned subsidiaries are
not a party to, guarantor of, or security provider in respect of
the Facility.
|
|
12.
|
FAIR
VALUE MEASUREMENTS
|
Assets and liabilities of the Company that are carried at fair
value are classified in one of the following three categories:
|
|
Level 1
|
Quoted market prices in active markets for identical assets and
liabilities that the Company has the ability to access at the
measurement date;
|
|
Level 2
|
Observable market-based inputs or unobservable inputs that are
corroborated by market data for the asset or liability at the
measurement date;
|
|
Level 3
|
Unobservable inputs that are not corroborated by market data
used when there is minimal market activity for the asset or
liability at the measurement date.
|
Fair value measurements of assets and liabilities are assigned a
level within the fair value hierarchy based on the lowest level
of any input that is significant to the fair value measurement
in its entirety.
The Companys financial instruments consist primarily of
cash and cash equivalents, restricted cash and cash equivalents,
restricted short-term
|
|
94
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
investments, trade receivables,
trade payables, debt and interest rate swaps.
Cash and cash equivalents, Restricted cash and cash
equivalents, Trade receivables and Trade
payables These items are recorded in the
financial statements at historical cost. The historical cost
basis for these amounts is estimated to approximate their
respective fair values due to the short maturity of these
instruments.
Restricted short-term investments Restricted
short-term investments are recorded in the financial statements
at fair value. The fair value of restricted short-term
investments is based on quoted market prices. Changes in fair
value are recorded as other comprehensive income and included as
a component in shareholders deficit. Restricted short-term
investments are held and managed by the AICF and are reported at
their fair value. At 31 March 2009, the Company determined
that these investments were
other-than-temporarily
impaired due to the economic environment, the length of time the
fair value of the assets were less than cost and the extent of
the discount of the fair vale compared to the cost of the
assets. Accordingly, for the year ended 31 March 2009, the
Company recognised an
other-than-temporary
impairment charge on these investments of US$14.8 million
within Other Expense. The Company recorded an unrealised
gain on these restricted short-term investments of
US$1.3 million for the year ended 31 March 2011. This
unrealised gain is included as a separate component of
accumulated other comprehensive income.
Debt Debt is generally recorded in the
financial statements at historical cost. The carrying value of
debt provided under the Companys credit facilities
approximates fair value since the interest rates charged under
these credit facilities are tied directly to market rates and
fluctuate as market rates change.
Interest Rate Swaps Interest rate swaps are
recorded in the financial statements at fair value. Changes in
fair value are recorded in the statement of operations in
Other Income. At 31 March 2011, the Company had
interest rate swap contracts with a total notional principal of
US$200.0 million. For all of these interest rate swap
contracts, the Company has agreed to pay fixed interest rates
while receiving a floating interest rate. The purpose of holding
these interest rate swap contracts is to protect against upward
movements in US$ LIBOR and the associated interest the Company
pays on its external credit facilities.
The fair value of interest rate swap contracts is calculated
based on the fixed rate, notional principal, settlement date and
present value of the future cash inflows and outflows based on
the terms of the agreement and the future floating interest
rates as determined by a future interest rate yield curve. The
model used to value the interest rate swap contracts is based
upon well recognised financial principles, and interest rate
yield curves can be validated through readily observable data by
external sources. Although readily observable data is used in
the valuations, different valuation methodologies could have an
effect on the estimated fair value. Accordingly, the interest
rate swap contracts are categorised as Level 2.
At 31 March 2011, the weighted average fixed interest rate
of these contracts is 2.4% and the weighted average remaining
life is 2.6 years. These contracts have a fair value of
US$6.1 million, which is included in Accounts
Payable. For the year ended 31 March 2011, the Company
included in Other Income an unrealised loss on interest
rate swaps of US$3.8 million. Included in Interest
Expense is a realised loss on settlements of interest rate
swap contracts of US$3.9 million for the year ended
31 March 2011.
The following table sets forth by level within the fair value
hierarchy, the Companys financial assets and liabilities
that were accounted for at fair value on a recurring basis at
31 March 2011 according to the valuation techniques the
Company used to determine their fair values.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value Measurements
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at
|
|
|
Using Inputs Considered as
|
|
|
|
(Millions of US Dollars)
|
|
31 March 2011
|
|
|
Level 1
|
|
|
Level 2
|
|
|
Level 3
|
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
18.6
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
61.4
|
|
|
|
61.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted short-term investments
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Assets
|
|
$
|
85.8
|
|
|
$
|
85.8
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap contracts included in Accounts Payable
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities
|
|
$
|
6.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
6.1
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.
COMMITMENT AND CONTINGENCIES
The Company is involved from time to time in various legal
proceedings and administrative actions incidental or related to
the normal conduct of its business, including litigation
concerning its products. Although it is impossible to predict
the outcome of any pending legal proceeding, management believes
that such proceedings and actions should not, except as it
relates to asbestos, the Australian Securities and Investments
Commission (ASIC) proceedings, the matters described
in the Environmental and Legal section below, the amended
assessment from the Australian Taxation Office (ATO)
and income taxes as described in these financial statements,
individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect
on its consolidated financial position, results of operations or
cash flows.
ASIC
Proceedings
In February 2007, the Australian Securities and Investments
Commission (ASIC) commenced civil proceedings in the
Supreme Court of New South Wales against the Company, ABN 60 and
ten then-present or former officers and directors of the James
Hardie Group. While the subject matter of the allegations varied
between individual defendants, the allegations against the
Company were confined to alleged contraventions of provisions of
the Australian Corporations Act/Law relating to continuous
disclosure and engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct in
respect of a security.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
95
|
The Company defended each of the
allegations made by ASIC and the orders sought against it in the
proceedings, as did the former directors and officers of the
Company.
The proceedings commenced on 29 September 2008 before his
Honour Justice Gzell. On 23 April 2009, Justice Gzell
issued judgment against the Company and the ten former officers
and directors of the Company.
All defendants other than two lodged appeals against Justice
Gzells judgments, and ASIC responded by lodging cross
appeals against the appellants. The appeals lodged by the former
directors and officers were heard in April 2010 and the appeal
lodged by the Company was heard in May 2010.
On 30 September 2010, the Company entered into agreements
with third parties and subsequently received payment for
US$10.3 million relating to the costs of the ASIC
proceedings for certain former officers. These recoveries are
reflected as a reduction to selling, general and administrative
expenses for the year ended 31 March 2011. The Company
notes that other recoveries may be available resulting from
repayments by third parties, including former directors and
officers, in accordance with the terms of their indemnities.
On 17 December 2010, the New South Wales Court of Appeal
dismissed the Companys appeal against Justice Gzells
judgment and ASICs cross appeal and ordered that the
Company pay 90% of the costs incurred by ASIC in respect of the
Companys appeal. The Court of Appeal also allowed the
appeals brought by the non-executive directors, dismissed
ASICs related cross-appeals, and ordered ASIC to pay the
non-executive directors costs of the proceedings and the
appeals. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeals and cross
appeals in respect of certain former officers in part and
reserved certain matters for further submissions. On 6 May
2011, the Court of Appeal rendered judgment in the exoneration,
penalty and cost matter for certain former officers in which it
varied certain orders made at first instance and ordered that
there be no order as to the costs of the appeals of the certain
former officers and ASICs related cross-appeals.
The amount of the costs the Company may be required to pay to
ASIC following the Court of Appeal judgments is contingent on a
number of factors, which include, without limitation, whether
such costs (including the costs orders in ASICs favour
against us in the first instance hearing, which orders were not
disturbed by the Court of Appeal) are reasonable having regard
to the issues pursued in the case by ASIC against us, the
associated legal work undertaken specifically in respect of
those issues (as distinct from the legal costs of a previous
claim and related order against us that was withdrawn by ASIC in
September 2008 just prior to the commencement of the first
instance trial, the legal costs incurred by ASIC in connection
with similar or overlapping claims against other parties in the
first instance or appeal proceedings and the successful
interlocutory appeal by the Company against ASIC during the
course of the first instance hearing), the number of legal
practitioners involved in such legal work and their applicable
fee rates.
In light of the uncertainty surrounding the amount of such
costs, the Company has not recorded any provision for these
costs at 31 March 2011.
ASIC subsequently filed applications for special leave to appeal
to the High Court appealing from the Court of Appeals judgment
in favour of the former directors appeals and a former
officer. Certain former officers have also filed special leave
applications to the High Court. The Company did not file
application for special leave to the High Court. The High Court
granted ASICs applications for special leave on
13 May 2011. The High Court also granted the special leave
applications for one of the former officers, and the other
former officer withdrew his application.
As with the first instance proceedings, the Company will pay a
portion of the costs of bringing and defending appeals, with the
remaining costs being met by third parties, including former
directors and executives, in accordance with the terms of their
applicable indemnities. Losses and expenses arising from the
ASIC proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash
flows. It is our policy to expense legal costs as incurred.
Environmental and
Legal
The operations of the Company, like those of other companies
engaged in similar businesses, are subject to a number of laws
and regulations on air and water quality, waste handling and
disposal. The Companys policy is to accrue for
environmental costs when it is determined that it is probable
that an obligation exists and the amount can be reasonably
estimated.
In addition, the Company is involved from time to time in
various legal proceedings and administrative actions concerning
the Companys operations and products, including putative
class action lawsuits. With respect to asserted claims, the
Company believes it has made adequate provision on its
consolidated balance sheet as of 31 March 2011 for asserted
claims that are reasonably estimable. Although it is reasonably
possible that the Company could experience an unexpected
increase in the cost of asserted claims and may be subject to
new asserted claims in the future, the Company is unable to
estimate an amount or range of loss in relation to such matters.
Management is of the opinion that, based on information
presently known, the liability for such matters should not have
a material adverse effect on either the Companys
consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows.
Operating
Leases
As the lessee, the Company principally enters into property,
building and equipment leases. The following are future minimum
lease payments for non-cancellable operating leases having a
remaining term in excess of one year at 31 March 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
Years ending 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars):
|
|
|
|
2012
|
|
$
|
18.0
|
|
2013
|
|
|
16.5
|
|
2014
|
|
|
15.6
|
|
2015
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
2016
|
|
|
14.0
|
|
Thereafter
|
|
|
24.6
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
103.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rental expense amounted to US$15.3 million,
US$13.2 million and US$14.5 million for the years
ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Capital
Commitments
Commitments for the acquisition of plant and equipment and other
purchase obligations contracted for but not recognised as
liabilities and generally payable within one year, were
US$0.6 million at 31 March 2011.
|
|
96
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
14.
AUSTRALIAN TAXATION OFFICE AMENDED ASSESSMENT
In March 2006, RCI Pty Ltd (RCI), a wholly-owned
subsidiary of the Company, received an amended assessment from
the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) with respect to
RCIs income tax return for the year ended 31 March
1999. The amended assessment related to the amount of net
capital gains arising as a result of an internal corporate
restructure carried out in 1998 and was issued pursuant to the
discretion granted to the Commissioner of Taxation under
Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act 1936. The amended
assessment issued to RCI was for a total of
A$412.0 million. However, after subsequent remissions of
general interest charges (GIC) by the ATO the total
was changed to A$368.0 million, comprising primary tax
after allowable credits, penalties, and GIC.
During fiscal year 2007 RCI agreed with the ATO that in
accordance with the ATO Receivable Policy, RCI would pay 50% of
the total amended assessment being A$184.0 million
(US$152.5 million), and provide a guarantee from James
Hardie Industries SE (formerly James Hardie Industries N.V.) in
favour of the ATO for the remaining unpaid 50% of the amended
assessment, pending outcome of the appeal of the amended
assessment. RCI also agreed to pay GIC accruing on the unpaid
balance of the amended assessment in arrears on a quarterly
basis.
The ATO conceded that RCI has a reasonably arguable position
that the amount of net capital gains arising as a result of the
corporate restructure carried out in 1998 was reported correctly
in the fiscal year 1999 tax return and that Part IVA does
not apply.
On 30 May 2007, the ATO issued a Notice of Decision
disallowing RCIs objection to the amended assessment
(Objection Decision). On 11 July 2007, RCI
filed an application appealing the Objection Decision and the
matter was heard before the Federal Court of Australia in
September 2009.
On 1 September 2010, the Federal Court of Australia
dismissed RCIs appeal.
Prior to the Federal Courts decision on RCIs appeal,
the Company believed it was more-likely-than-not that the tax
position reported in RCIs tax return for the 1999 fiscal
year would be upheld on appeal. As a result, until
31 August 2010, the Company treated the payment of 50% of
the amended assessment, GIC and interest accrued on amounts paid
to the ATO with respect to the amended assessment as a deposit
on its consolidated balance sheet.
As a result of the Federal Courts decision, the Company
re-assessed its tax position with respect to the amended
assessment and concluded that the
more-likely-than-not recognition threshold as
prescribed by US GAAP was no longer met. Accordingly, with
effect from 1 September 2010, the Company removed the
deposit with the ATO from its consolidated balance sheet and
recognised an expense of US$345.2 million
(A$388.0 million) on its consolidated statement of
operations, which did not result in a cash outflow for the year
ended ended 31 March 2011. In addition, the Company
recognised an uncertain tax position of US$190.4 million
(A$184.3 million) on its consolidated balance sheet
relating to the unpaid portion of the amended assessment.
RCI strongly disputes the amended assessment and is pursuing an
appeal of the Federal Courts judgment. RCIs appeal
was heard from 16 May 2011 to 18 May 2011 before the
Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. Judgment has been
reserved.
With effect from 1 September 2010, the Company has expensed
payments of GIC to the ATO as incurred. The Company will
continue to expense GIC as incurred until RCI ultimately
prevails on the matter or the remaining outstanding balance of
the amended assessment is paid.
The ATO was awarded costs in connection with RCIs appeal
of the objection decision to the Federal Court of Australia. The
Company has made a provision for such costs within other
non-current liabilities on the Companys consolidated
balance sheet at 31 March 2011.
15.
INCOME TAXES
Income tax expense includes income taxes currently payable and
those deferred because of temporary differences between the
financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities.
Income tax (expense) benefit consists of the following
components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from operations before income taxes:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic1
|
|
$
|
66.5
|
|
|
$
|
12.8
|
|
|
$
|
24.6
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
30.1
|
|
|
|
(31.5
|
)
|
|
|
131.2
|
|
|
|
Total income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
$
|
96.6
|
|
|
$
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
155.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic1
|
|
$
|
(15.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.6
|
|
|
$
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
(447.4
|
)
|
|
|
(137.7
|
)
|
|
|
37.4
|
|
|
|
Current income tax (expense) benefit
|
|
|
(463.0
|
)
|
|
|
(137.1
|
)
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
Deferred:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Domestic1
|
|
|
(22.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
|
|
(0.1
|
)
|
Foreign
|
|
|
41.6
|
|
|
|
71.8
|
|
|
|
(56.7
|
)
|
|
|
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
|
|
|
19.4
|
|
|
|
70.9
|
|
|
|
(56.8
|
)
|
|
|
Total income tax expense
|
|
$
|
(443.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
(66.2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19.5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Since JHI SE became an Irish parent
holding company during fiscal year 2011, domestic represents
both Ireland and The Netherlands for fiscal year 2011. For
fiscal years 2010 and 2009, domestic represents The Netherlands.
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
97
|
Income tax (expense) benefit computed at the statutory rates
represents taxes on income applicable to all jurisdictions in
which the Company conducts business, calculated at the statutory
income tax rate in each jurisdiction multiplied by the pre-tax
income attributable to that jurisdiction.
Income tax (expense) benefit is reconciled to the tax at the
statutory rates as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Income tax (expense) benefit at statutory tax rates
|
|
|
$(18.3
|
)
|
|
|
$8.3
|
|
|
|
$(47.0
|
)
|
US state income taxes, net of the federal benefit
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
Asbestos effect of foreign exchange
|
|
|
(31.7
|
)
|
|
|
(66.4
|
)
|
|
|
51.2
|
|
Benefit from Dutch financial risk reserve regime
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
Expenses not deductible
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
(7.8
|
)
|
Non-assessable items
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
Income (losses) not available for carryforward
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
|
|
(4.1
|
)
|
Repatriation of foreign earnings
|
|
|
(32.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in reserves
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
(13.4
|
)
|
Amortisation of intangibles
|
|
|
(5.9
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxes on foreign income
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
(2.7
|
)
|
State amended returns and audit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
Tax assessment in dispute
|
|
|
(349.1
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other permanent items
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
Total income tax expense
|
|
|
$ (443.6
|
)
|
|
|
$ (66.2
|
)
|
|
|
$ (19.5
|
)
|
|
|
Effective tax rate
|
|
|
-459.2
|
%
|
|
|
354.0
|
%
|
|
|
12.5
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax balances consist of the following components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos liability
|
|
$
|
461.9
|
|
|
$
|
436.6
|
|
Other provisions and accruals
|
|
|
35.7
|
|
|
|
37.4
|
|
Net operating loss carryforwards
|
|
|
32.5
|
|
|
|
9.9
|
|
Capital loss carryforwards
|
|
|
34.3
|
|
|
|
30.4
|
|
Prepayments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets
|
|
|
564.4
|
|
|
|
517.3
|
|
|
|
Valuation allowance
|
|
|
(43.1
|
)
|
|
|
(39.2
|
)
|
|
|
Total deferred tax assets, net of valuation allowance
|
|
|
521.3
|
|
|
|
478.1
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciable and amortisable assets
|
|
|
(114.9
|
)
|
|
|
(115.7
|
)
|
Accrued interest income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12.0
|
)
|
Foreign currency movements
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Unremitted earnings
|
|
|
(32.6
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(4.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deferred tax liabilities
|
|
|
(151.7
|
)
|
|
|
(128.0
|
)
|
|
|
Net deferred tax assets
|
|
$
|
369.6
|
|
|
$
|
350.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
98
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
The Company establishes a valuation allowance against a deferred
tax asset if it is more likely than not that some portion or all
of the deferred tax asset will not be realised. The Company has
established a valuation allowance pertaining to all of its
Australian and European capital loss carry-forwards. The
valuation allowance increased by US$3.9 million during
fiscal year 2011 due to foreign currency movements.
At 31 March 2011, the Company had Australian and Irish tax
loss carry-forwards of approximately US$47.1 million and
US$23.6 million, respectively, that will never expire. The
Company has a US tax loss carry-forward of US$18.7 million
that will expire in 2031.
At 31 March 2011, the Company had US$114.3 million in
Australian capital loss carry-forwards which will never expire.
At 31 March 2011, the Company had a 100% valuation
allowance against the Australian capital loss carry-forwards.
At 31 March 2011, the Company had European tax loss
carry-forwards of approximately US$33.3 million that are
available to offset future taxable income, of which
US$24.0 million will never expire. Carry-forwards of
US$9.4 million will expire in fiscal years 2014 through
2019. At 31 March 2011, the Company had a 100% valuation
allowance against the European tax loss carry-forwards.
In determining the need for and the amount of a valuation
allowance in respect of the Companys asbestos related
deferred tax asset, management reviewed the relevant empirical
evidence, including the current and past core earnings of the
Australian business and forecast earnings of the Australian
business considering current trends. Although realisation of the
deferred tax asset will occur over the life of the AFFA, which
extends beyond the forecast period for the Australian business,
Australia provides an unlimited carry-forward period for tax
losses. Based upon managements review, the Company
believes that it is more likely than not that the Company will
realise its asbestos related deferred tax asset and that no
valuation allowance is necessary as of 31 March 2011. In
the future, based on review of the empirical evidence by
management at that time, if management determines that
realisation of its asbestos related deferred tax asset is not
more likely than not, the Company may need to provide a
valuation allowance to reduce the carrying value of the asbestos
related deferred tax asset to its realisable value.
At 31 March 2011, the undistributed earnings of non-Irish
subsidiaries approximated US$930.5 million. Subsequent to
31 March 2011, the Company adopted a plan to reorganise its
subsidiary holding company structure. As a result, the Company
has recognised deferred taxes of US$32.6 million on
undistributed earnings of its US subsidiaries, as it intends to
remit US earnings as part of the Companys plan. At
31 March 2011, the undistributed earnings of US
subsidiaries approximated US$651.4 million. Except as noted
above, the Company intends to indefinitely reinvest its
undistributed earnings of other non-Irish subsidiaries and has
not provided for taxes that would be payable upon remittance of
those earnings. The amount of the potential deferred tax
liability related to undistributed earnings is impracticable to
determine at this time.
The Company is subject to ongoing reviews by taxing
jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to
various positions the Company asserts on its income tax returns.
The Company accrues for tax contingencies based upon its best
estimate of the taxes ultimately expected to be paid, which it
updates over time as more information becomes available. Such
amounts are included in taxes payable or other non-current
liabilities, as appropriate. If the Company ultimately
determines that payment of these amounts is unnecessary, the
Company reverses the liability and recognises a tax benefit
during the period in which the Company determines that the
liability is no longer necessary. The Company records additional
tax expense in the period in which it determines that the
recorded tax liability is less than the ultimate assessment it
expects.
In fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, the Company recorded an
income tax expense of nil, US$2.2 million, and an income
tax benefit of US$3.0 million, respectively, as a result of
the finalisation of certain tax audits (whereby certain matters
were settled), the expiration of the statute of limitations
related to certain tax positions and adjustments to income tax
balances based on the filing of amended income tax returns,
which give rise to the benefit recorded by the Company.
The Company or its subsidiaries files income tax returns in
various jurisdictions including the United States, The
Netherlands, Australia, the Philippines and Ireland. The Company
is no longer subject to US federal examinations by US Internal
Revenue Service (IRS) for tax years prior to tax
year 2008. The Company is no longer subject to examinations by
The Netherlands tax authority, for tax years prior to tax year
2005. The Company is no longer subject to Australian federal
examinations by the Australian Taxation Office (ATO)
for tax years prior to tax year 2007.
In connection with the Companys re-domicile from The
Netherlands to Ireland, the Company became an Irish tax resident
on 29 June 2010. While the Company was domiciled in The
Netherlands, the Company derived significant tax benefits under
the
US-Netherlands
tax treaty. The treaty was amended during fiscal year 2005 and
became effective for the Company on 1 February 2006. The
amended treaty provided, among other things, requirements that
the Company must meet for the Company to qualify for treaty
benefits and its effective income tax rate. During fiscal year
2006, the Company made changes to its organisational and
operational structure to satisfy the requirements of the amended
treaty and believes that it was in compliance and qualified for
treaty benefits while the Company was domiciled in The
Netherlands. However, if during a subsequent tax audit or
related process, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS)
determines that these changes did not meet the requirements, the
Company may not qualify for treaty benefits and its effective
income tax rate could significantly increase beginning in the
fiscal year that such determination is made, and it could be
liable for taxes owed for calendar year 2008 and subsequent
periods in which the Company was domiciled in The Netherlands.
The Company believes that it is more likely than not that it was
in compliance and should qualify for treaty benefits for
calendar year 2008 and subsequent periods in which the Company
was domiciled in The Netherlands. Therefore, the Company
believes that the requirements for recording a liability have
not been met and therefore it has not recorded any liability at
31 March 2011.
ATO
Settlement
As announced on 12 December 2008, the Company and the ATO
reached an agreement that finalised tax audits being conducted
by the ATO on the Companys Australian income tax returns
for the years ended 31 March 2002 and 31 March 2004
through 31 March 2006 and settled all outstanding issues
arising from these tax audits. With the exception of the
assessment in respect of RCI for the 1999 financial year, the
settlement concluded ATO audit activities for all years prior to
the year ended 31 March 2007.
The agreed settlement, made without concessions or admissions of
liability by either the Company or the ATO, required the Company
to pay an amount of US$101.6 million (A$153.0 million)
in December 2008.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
99
|
Dutch Exit
Tax
In connection with implementing Stage 1 of the Companys
proposal to re-domicile its corporate seat from The Netherlands
to Ireland, the Company incurred a tax liability that arose
from: (i) a capital gain on the transfer of its
intellectual property from The Netherlands to a newly-formed
James Hardie entity and (ii) the exit from the Dutch
Financial Risk Reserve regime.
The Dutch Tax Authority (the DTA) reviewed the
Companys assessed fair value of the intellectual property
as performed by a third party valuation firm. Based on the
DTAs review, the Company incurred a capital gain and Dutch
tax liability, which has been deferred and included in
non-current Other Assets, net of amortisation, on the
Companys consolidated balance sheet as of 31 March
2011 and is being amortised on a straight-line basis over the
remaining useful life of the intellectual property.
Unrecognised Tax
Benefits
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of
unrecognised tax benefits and interest and penalties are as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrecognised
|
|
|
Interest and
|
|
(US$ millions)
|
|
tax benefits
|
|
|
Penalties
|
|
|
|
Balance at 1 April 2008
|
|
$
|
61.9
|
|
|
$
|
47.0
|
|
Additions for tax positions of the current year
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions (deletions) for tax positions of prior year
|
|
|
37.3
|
|
|
|
(14.3
|
)
|
Settlements paid during the current period
|
|
|
(72.0
|
)
|
|
|
(39.6
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
(16.6
|
)
|
|
|
(9.1
|
)
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2009
|
|
$
|
12.3
|
|
|
$
|
(16.0
|
)
|
Additions for tax positions of the current year
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions (deletions) for tax positions of prior year
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
(4.1
|
)
|
Other reductions for the tax positions of prior periods
|
|
|
(10.2
|
)
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6.2
|
)
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2010
|
|
$
|
7.7
|
|
|
$
|
(26.9
|
)
|
Additions for tax positions of the current year
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions for tax positions of prior year
|
|
|
153.3
|
|
|
|
195.8
|
|
Other reductions for the tax positions of prior periods
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation adjustment
|
|
|
24.8
|
|
|
|
27.6
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2011
|
|
$
|
185.5
|
|
|
$
|
196.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of 31 March 2011, the total amount of unrecognised tax
benefits and the total amount of interest and penalties accrued
related to unrecognised tax benefits that, if recognised, would
affect the effective tax rate is US$185.5 million and
US$196.3 million, respectively.
The Company recognises penalties and interest accrued related to
unrecognised tax benefits in income tax expense. During the year
ended 31 March 2011 and 2010, the total amount of interest
and penalties recognised in tax expense was an expense of
US$195.6 million and a benefit of US$4.7 million,
respectively.
Except for the liability associated with the ATO amended
assessment as disclosed in Note 14, the liabilities
associated with uncertain tax benefits are included in other
non-current liabilities on the Companys consolidated
balance sheet.
A number of years may lapse before an uncertain tax position is
audited and ultimately settled. It is difficult to predict the
ultimate outcome or the timing of resolution for uncertain tax
positions. It is reasonably possible that the amount of
unrecognised tax benefits could significantly increase or
decrease within the next twelve months. These changes could
result from the settlement of ongoing litigation, the completion
of ongoing examinations, the expiration of the statute of
limitations, or other circumstances. At this time, an estimate
of the range of the reasonably possible change cannot be made.
16.
STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION
At 31 March 2011, the Company had the following equity
award plans: the Executive Share Purchase Plan; the JHI SE 2001
Equity Incentive Plan and the Long-Term Incentive Plan 2006 as
amended in 2008.
Compensation expense arising from equity-based award grants as
estimated using pricing models was US$9.1 million,
US$7.7 million and US$7.2 million for the years ended
31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of
31 March 2011, the unrecorded deferred stock-based
compensation related to equity awards was US$9.8 million
after estimated forfeitures and will be recognised over an
estimated weighted average amortisation period of 2.5 years.
JHI SE 2001
Equity Incentive Plan
Under the JHI SE 2001 Equity Incentive Plan (the 2001
Equity Incentive Plan), the Company can grant equity
awards in the form of nonqualified stock options, performance
awards, restricted stock grants, stock appreciation rights,
dividend equivalent rights, phantom stock or other stock-based
benefits such as restricted stock units. The 2001 Equity
Incentive Plan was approved by the Companys shareholders
and the Joint Board subject to implementation of the
consummation of the 2001 Reorganisation. The Company is
authorised to issue 45,077,100 shares under the 2001 Equity
Incentive Plan.
Under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, grants have been made at
fair market value to management and other employees of the
Company. Each option confers the right to subscribe for one
ordinary share in the capital of JHI SE. The options may be
exercised as follows: 25% after the first year; 25% after the
second year; and 50% after the third year. All unexercised
options expire 10 years from the date of issue or
90 days after the employee ceases to be employed by the
Company.
As set out in the plan rules, the exercise prices and the number
of shares available on exercise may be adjusted on the
occurrence of certain events, including new issues, share
splits, rights issues and capital reconstructions.
Under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, the Company granted
348,426 and 278,569 restricted stock units to its employees in
the years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively. These
restricted shares may not be sold, transferred, assigned,
pledged or otherwise encumbered so long as such shares remain
restricted. The Company determines the conditions or
restrictions of any restricted stock awards, which may include
requirements of continued employment, individual performance or
the Companys financial performance or other criteria. At
31 March 2011, there were 854,409 restricted stock units
outstanding under this plan.
|
|
100
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
Long-Term
Incentive Plan
At the 2006 Annual General Meeting, the Companys
shareholders approved the establishment of a Long-Term Incentive
Plan (LTIP) to provide incentives to certain members
of senior management (Executives). The shareholders
also approved, in accordance with certain LTIP rules, the issue
of options in the Company to Executives of the Company. At the
Companys 2008 Annual General Meeting, the shareholders
amended the LTIP to also allow restricted stock units to be
granted under the LTIP.
In November 2006 and August 2007, 1,132,000 and 1,016,000
options were granted to Executives, respectively, under the
LTIP. The vesting of these equity awards are subject to
performance hurdles as outlined in the LTIP rules.
Unexercised options expire 10 years from the date of issue
unless an Executive ceases employment with the Company.
The Company granted the following restricted stock units under
the LTIP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted
|
|
|
|
Stock Units
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
Granted
|
|
|
|
15 September 2008
|
|
|
1,023,865
|
|
17 December 2008
|
|
|
545,757
|
|
29 May 2009
|
|
|
1,066,595
|
|
15 September 2009
|
|
|
522,000
|
|
11 December 2009
|
|
|
181,656
|
|
7 June 2010
|
|
|
807,457
|
|
15 September 2010
|
|
|
951,194
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,098,524
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
These restricted stock units may not be sold, transferred,
assigned, pledged or otherwise encumbered so long as such shares
remain restricted. The Company determines the conditions or
restrictions of any restricted stock awards, which may include
requirements of continued employment, individual performance or
the Companys financial performance or other criteria.
Restricted stock units expire on exercise, vesting or as set out
in the LTIP rules.
At 31 March 2011, there were 1,937,000 options and
4,257,686 restricted stock units outstanding under this plan.
Stock
Options
The Company estimates the fair value of each stock option on the
date of grant using either the Black-Scholes option-pricing
model or a binomial lattice model that incorporates a Monte
Carlo Simulation (the Monte Carlo method). The
Companys stock based-compensation expense is the estimated
fair value of options granted over the periods in which the
stock options vest. There were no stock options granted during
the years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009.
The following table summarises the Companys stock options
available for grant and the activity in the Companys
outstanding options during the noted period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding Options
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
|
Shares Available for Grant
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Exercise Price (A$)
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2009
|
|
|
23,747,833
|
|
|
|
18,272,928
|
|
|
|
7.28
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,058,275
|
)
|
|
|
5.51
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,770,215
|
)
|
|
|
7.97
|
|
Forfeitures available for re-grant
|
|
|
1,540,215
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2010
|
|
|
25,288,048
|
|
|
|
14,444,438
|
|
|
|
7.44
|
|
|
|
Exercised
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(530,984
|
)
|
|
|
5.19
|
|
Forfeited
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,558,159
|
)
|
|
|
8.10
|
|
Forfeitures available for re-grant
|
|
|
1,468,159
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at 31 March 2011
|
|
|
26,756,207
|
|
|
|
11,355,295
|
|
|
|
7.40
|
|
|
|
The total intrinsic value of stock options exercised was
A$0.6 million, A$4.7 million and nil for the years
ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
Windfall tax benefits realised in the United States from stock
options exercised and included in cash flows from financing
activities in the consolidated statements of cash flows were
US$0.4 million, US$0.9 million and nil for the years
ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
101
|
The following table summarises outstanding and exercisable
options under both the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan and the LTIP
as of 31 March 2011:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding
|
|
|
Options Exercisable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
|
|
|
Aggregate
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exercise
|
|
|
Intrinsic
|
|
Price (A$)
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Life (in Years)
|
|
|
Price (A$)
|
|
|
Value
|
|
|
Number
|
|
|
Price (A$)
|
|
|
Value (A$)
|
|
|
|
|
5.06
|
|
|
100,673
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
5.06
|
|
|
|
104,700
|
|
|
|
100,673
|
|
|
|
5.06
|
|
|
|
104,700
|
|
5.99
|
|
|
1,321,250
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
5.99
|
|
|
|
145,337
|
|
|
|
1,321,250
|
|
|
|
5.99
|
|
|
|
145,337
|
|
6.30
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
6.30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
93,000
|
|
|
|
6.30
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.38
|
|
|
2,250,317
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
|
|
6.38
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,250,317
|
|
|
|
6.38
|
|
|
|
|
|
6.45
|
|
|
723,500
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
6.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
723,500
|
|
|
|
6.45
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.05
|
|
|
1,534,250
|
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
7.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,534,250
|
|
|
|
7.05
|
|
|
|
|
|
7.83
|
|
|
1,016,000
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
7.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
794,680
|
|
|
|
7.83
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.40
|
|
|
2,402,205
|
|
|
|
5.7
|
|
|
|
8.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,225,805
|
|
|
|
8.40
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.90
|
|
|
1,899,100
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
8.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,899,100
|
|
|
|
8.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
9.50
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
9.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
15,000
|
|
|
|
9.50
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
11,355,295
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
7.40
|
|
|
|
250,037
|
|
|
|
10,957,575
|
|
|
|
7.38
|
|
|
|
250,037
|
|
|
The aggregate intrinsic value in the preceding table represents
the total pre-tax intrinsic value based on stock options with an
exercise price less than the Companys closing stock price
of A$6.10 as of 31 March 2011, which would have been
received by the option holders had those option holders
exercised their options as of that date.
Restricted
Stock
The Company estimates the fair value of restricted stock units
on the date of grant and recognises this estimated fair value as
compensation expense over the periods in which the restricted
stock vests.
The following table summarises the Companys restricted
stock activity during the noted period:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted Average
|
|
|
|
|
Fair Value at Grant
|
|
|
Shares
|
|
Date (A$)
|
|
|
Non-vested at 31 March 2009
|
|
2,991,061
|
|
3.95
|
Granted
|
|
2,048,820
|
|
5.38
|
Vested
|
|
(208,884)
|
|
3.85
|
Forfeited
|
|
(94,276)
|
|
4.32
|
|
Non-vested at 31 March 2010
|
|
4,736,721
|
|
4.57
|
Granted
|
|
2,107,077
|
|
5.85
|
Vested
|
|
(970,793)
|
|
4.94
|
Forfeited
|
|
(760,910)
|
|
5.15
|
|
Non-vested at 31 March 2011
|
|
5,112,095
|
|
4.94
|
|
Restricted
Stock service vesting
The Company granted restricted stock units with a service
vesting condition to employees as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Grant Date
|
|
Equity Award Plan
|
|
Restricted Stock Units Granted
|
|
|
17 June 2008
|
|
2001 Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
698,440
|
15 September 2008
|
|
Long-Term Incentive Plan
|
|
201,324
|
17 December 2008
|
|
2001 Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
992,271
|
29 May 2009
|
|
Long-Term Incentive Plan
|
|
1,066,595
|
7 December 2009
|
|
2001 Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
278,569
|
7 December 2010
|
|
2001 Equity Incentive Plan
|
|
348,426
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,585,625
|
|
|
|
102
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
The fair value of each restricted stock unit (service vesting)
is equal to the market value of the Companys common stock
on the date of grant, adjusted for the fair value of dividends
as the restricted stock holder is not entitled to dividends over
the vesting period.
Restricted
Stock performance vesting
The Company issued 807,457 restricted stock units with a
performance vesting condition under the LTIP to senior
executives of the Company for the year ended 31 March 2011.
The vesting of the restricted stock units is deferred for two
years and the amount of restricted stock units that will vest at
that time is dependent on the scorecard rating of the award
recipient. The scorecard reflects a number of key qualitative
and quantitative performance objectives and the outcomes the
Board expects to see achieved at the end of the vesting period.
When the scorecard is applied at the conclusion of fiscal year
2012, the award recipients may receive all, some, or none of
their awards. The scorecard can only be applied by the Board to
exercise discretion at the percentage of restricted stock units
that will vest. The scorecard may not be applied to enhance the
maximum award that was originally granted to the award recipient.
The fair value of each restricted stock unit (performance
vesting) is adjusted for changes in JHI SEs common stock
price at each balance sheet date until the scorecard is applied
at the conclusion of fiscal year 2012.
Restricted
Stock market condition
Under the terms of the LTIP, the Company granted 951,194 and
703,656 restricted stock units (market condition) to members of
the Companys Managing Board and senior managers during the
years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively. The
vesting of these restricted stock units is subject to a market
condition as outlined in the LITP rules.
The fair value of each of these restricted stock units (market
condition) granted under the LTIP is estimated using a binomial
lattice model that incorporates a Monte Carlo Simulation (the
Monte Carlo method).
The following table includes the assumptions used for restricted
stock grants (market condition) valued during the years ended
31 March 2011 and 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Date of grant
|
|
15 Sep 2010
|
|
|
11 Dec 2009
|
|
|
15 Sep 2009
|
|
|
|
|
Expected volatility
|
|
|
50.6%
|
|
|
|
49.9%
|
|
|
|
42.1%
|
|
Risk free interest rate
|
|
|
1.5%
|
|
|
|
2.1%
|
|
|
|
2.5%
|
|
Expected life in years
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
|
|
3.0
|
|
JHX stock price at grant date (A$)
|
|
|
5.94
|
|
|
|
8.20
|
|
|
|
7.04
|
|
Number of restricted stock units
|
|
|
951,194
|
|
|
|
181,656
|
|
|
|
522,000
|
|
|
Scorecard
LTI Cash Settled Units
Under the terms of the LTIP, the Company granted awards
equivalent to 821,459 and 1,089,265 Scorecard LTI units during
the years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively, that
provide recipients a cash incentive based on JHI SEs
common stock price on the vesting date. The vesting of awards is
measured on individual performance conditions based on certain
performance measures. Compensation expense recognised for awards
are based on the fair market value of JHI SEs common stock
on the date of grant and recorded as a liability. The liability
is adjusted for subsequent changes in JHI SEs common stock
price at each balance sheet date.
Cash Settled
Units
The Company granted 450 and 35,741 cash settled units (service
vesting) to employees during the years ended 31 March 2011
and 2010, respectively, under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan.
Compensation expense recognised for awards are based on the fair
market value of JHI SEs common stock on the date of grant
and recorded as a liability. The liability is adjusted for
subsequent changes in JHI SEs common stock price at each
balance sheet date.
The total compensation cost related to liability classified
awards for the years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010 was
US$2.2 million and US$1.6 million, respectively.
17.
OPERATING SEGMENT INFORMATION AND CONCENTRATIONS OF RISK
The Company has reported its operating segment information in
the format that the operating segment information is available
to and evaluated by the Companys management team. USA and
Europe Fibre Cement manufactures fibre cement interior linings,
exterior siding products and related accessories in the United
States; these products are sold in the United States, Canada and
Europe. Asia Pacific Fibre Cement includes all fibre cement
manufactured in Australia, New Zealand and the Philippines and
sold in Australia, New Zealand, Asia, the Middle East (Israel,
Kuwait, Qatar and United Arab Emirates), and various Pacific
Islands. Research and Development represents the cost incurred
by the research and development centres.
The Companys operating segments are strategic operating
units that are managed separately due to their different
products
and/or
geographical location. On 1 April 2008, the Company
realigned its operating segments by combining the previously
reported segments of USA Fibre Cement and Other into one
operating segment, USA and Europe Fibre Cement. On 22 May
2008, the Company ceased operation of its pipe business in the
United States.
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
103
|
Operating
Segments
The following are the Companys operating segments and
geographical information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales to
Customers1
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
USA & Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
$
|
814.0
|
|
|
$
|
828.1
|
|
|
$
|
929.3
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
353.0
|
|
|
|
296.5
|
|
|
|
273.3
|
|
|
Worldwide total
|
|
$
|
1,167.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,124.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,202.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (Loss) Before Income Taxes
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
USA & Europe Fibre
Cement2
|
|
$
|
160.3
|
|
|
$
|
208.5
|
|
|
$
|
199.3
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre
Cement2
|
|
|
79.4
|
|
|
|
58.7
|
|
|
|
47.1
|
|
Research and
Development2
|
|
|
(20.1
|
)
|
|
|
(19.0
|
)
|
|
|
(18.9
|
)
|
|
Segments total
|
|
|
219.6
|
|
|
|
248.2
|
|
|
|
227.5
|
|
General
Corporate3
|
|
|
(114.9
|
)
|
|
|
(269.2
|
)
|
|
|
(53.9
|
)
|
|
Total operating income (loss)
|
|
|
104.7
|
|
|
|
(21.0
|
)
|
|
|
173.6
|
|
Net interest
expense4
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
(4.0
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
Other (expense) income
|
|
|
(3.7
|
)
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
(14.8
|
)
|
|
Worldwide total
|
|
$
|
96.6
|
|
|
$
|
(18.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
155.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Identifiable Assets
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
USA & Europe Fibre Cement
|
|
$
|
752.0
|
|
|
$
|
780.8
|
|
Asia Pacific Fibre Cement
|
|
|
235.0
|
|
|
|
216.9
|
|
Research and Development
|
|
|
14.4
|
|
|
|
14.2
|
|
|
Segments total
|
|
|
1,001.4
|
|
|
|
1,011.9
|
|
General
Corporate5,6
|
|
|
959.2
|
|
|
|
1,166.9
|
|
|
Worldwide total
|
|
$
|
1,960.6
|
|
|
$
|
2,178.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Sales to
Customers1
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
USA
|
|
$
|
789.2
|
|
|
$
|
808.9
|
|
|
$
|
912.2
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
266.4
|
|
|
|
214.3
|
|
|
|
193.2
|
|
New Zealand
|
|
|
52.9
|
|
|
|
50.6
|
|
|
|
50.0
|
|
Other Countries
|
|
|
58.5
|
|
|
|
50.8
|
|
|
|
47.2
|
|
|
Worldwide total
|
|
$
|
1,167.0
|
|
|
$
|
1,124.6
|
|
|
$
|
1,202.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Identifiable Assets
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
USA
|
|
$
|
752.1
|
|
|
$
|
783.6
|
|
Australia
|
|
|
155.5
|
|
|
|
131.6
|
|
New Zealand
|
|
|
45.8
|
|
|
|
49.8
|
|
Other Countries
|
|
|
48.0
|
|
|
|
46.9
|
|
|
Segments total
|
|
|
1,001.4
|
|
|
|
1,011.9
|
|
General
Corporate5,6
|
|
|
959.2
|
|
|
|
1,166.9
|
|
|
Worldwide total
|
|
$
|
1,960.6
|
|
|
$
|
2,178.8
|
|
|
|
|
104
|
James Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
NOTES
TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(CONTINUED)
JAMES HARDIE
INDUSTRIES SE
|
|
|
1 |
|
Export sales and inter-segmental
sales are not significant.
|
|
2 |
|
Research and development costs of
US$9.7 million, US$10.4 million and
US$8.0 million in fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009,
respectively, were expensed in the USA and Europe Fibre Cement
segment. Research and development costs of US$1.4 million,
US$1.0 million and US$1.2 million in fiscal years
2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively, were expensed in the Asia
Pacific Fibre Cement segment. Research and development costs of
US$16.9 million, US$15.7 million and
US$14.4 million in fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009,
respectively, were expensed in the Research and Development
segment. The Research and Development segment also included
selling, general and administrative expenses of
US$3.2 million, US$3.3 million and US$4.5 million
in fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively.
|
|
|
|
Research and development
expenditures are expensed as incurred and in total amounted to
US$28.0 million, US$27.1 million and
US$23.8 million for the years ended 31 March 2011,
2010 and 2009, respectively.
|
|
3 |
|
The principal components of General
Corporate are officer and employee compensation and related
benefits, professional and legal fees, administrative costs, and
rental expense net of rental income on the Companys
corporate offices. Included in General Corporate for the year
ended 31 March 2011 are unfavourable asbestos adjustments
of US$85.8 million, AICF SG&A expenses of
US$2.2 million and a net benefit of US$8.7 million
related to the ASIC proceedings. Included in General Corporate
for the year ended 31 March 2010 are unfavourable asbestos
adjustments of US$224.2 million, AICF SG&A expenses of
US$2.1 million and ASIC expenses of US$3.4 million.
Included in General Corporate for the year ended 31 March
2009 are favourable asbestos adjustments of
US$17.4 million, AICF SG&A expenses of
US$0.7 million and ASIC expenses of US$14.0 million.
|
|
4 |
|
The Company does not report net
interest expense for each operating segment as operating
segments are not held directly accountable for interest expense.
Included in net interest (expense) income is AICF interest
income of US$4.3 million, US$3.3 million and
US$6.4 million in fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009,
respectively. See Note 11.
|
|
5 |
|
The Company does not report
deferred tax assets and liabilities for each operating segment
as operating segments are not held directly accountable for
deferred income taxes. All deferred income taxes are included in
General Corporate.
|
|
6 |
|
Asbestos-related assets at
31 March 2011 and 2010 are US$819.7 million and
US$797.7 million, respectively, and are included in the
General Corporate segment.
|
Concentrations of
Risk
The distribution channels for the Companys fibre cement
products are concentrated. If the Company were to lose one or
more of its major customers, there can be no assurance that the
Company will be able to find a replacement. Therefore, the loss
of one or more customers could have a material adverse effect on
the Companys consolidated financial position, results of
operations and cash flows.
The Company has two major customers that individually account
for over 10% of the Companys net sales in one or all of
the past three fiscal years.
These two customers accounts receivable represented 20%
and 29% of the Companys trade accounts receivable at
31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively. The following are
gross sales generated by these two customers, which are all from
the USA and Europe Fibre Cement segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
Customer A
|
|
$
|
208.9
|
|
|
|
17.9
|
|
|
$
|
224.4
|
|
|
|
20.0
|
|
|
$
|
277.1
|
|
|
|
23.0
|
|
Customer B
|
|
|
134.0
|
|
|
|
11.5
|
|
|
|
144.5
|
|
|
|
12.8
|
|
|
|
149.6
|
|
|
|
12.4
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
342.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
368.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
426.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Approximately 32% of the Companys fiscal year
2011 net sales were derived from outside the United States.
Consequently, changes in the value of foreign currencies could
significantly affect the consolidated financial position,
results of operations and cash flows of the Companys
non-US operations on translation into US dollars.
18.
ACCUMULATED OTHER
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
Accumulated other comprehensive income consists of the following
components:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
|
|
Pension and post-retirement benefit adjustments
|
|
$
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1.6
|
)
|
Unrealised gain on restricted short-term investments
|
|
|
2.5
|
|
|
|
1.2
|
|
Foreign currency translation adjustments
|
|
|
53.0
|
|
|
|
59.6
|
|
|
Total accumulated other comprehensive income
|
|
$
|
55.2
|
|
|
$
|
59.2
|
|
|
|
|
James
Hardie Annual Report 2011
|
105
|
(UNAUDITED,
NOT FORMING PART OF THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS)
Fees paid to our independent registered public accounting firm
for services provided for fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009 were
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March
|
|
(Millions of US dollars)
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
|
Audit
Fees1
|
|
$
|
2.7
|
|
|
$
|
2.7
|
|
|
$
|
2.4
|
|
Audit-Related
Fees2
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Audit Fees include the aggregate
fees for professional services rendered by our independent
registered public accounting firm. Professional services include
the audit of our annual financial statements and services that
are normally provided in connection with statutory and
regulatory filings.
|
|
2 |
|
Audit-Related Fees include the
aggregate fees billed for assurance and related services
rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm.
Our independent registered public accounting firm did not engage
any temporary employees to conduct any portion of the audit of
our consolidated financial statements for the fiscal years ended
31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009.
|
Audit Committee
Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures
In accordance with our Audit Committees policy and the
requirements of the law, all services provided by our
independent registered public accounting firm are pre-approved
annually by the Audit Committee. Pre-approval includes a list of
specific audit and non-audit services in the following
categories: audit services, audit-related services, tax services
and other services. Any additional services that we may ask our
independent registered public accounting firm to perform will be
set forth in a separate document requesting Audit Committee
approval in advance of the service being performed.
All of the services pre-approved by the Audit Committee are
permissible under the SECs auditor independence rules. To
avoid potential conflicts of interest, the law prohibits a
publicly traded company from obtaining certain non-audit
services from its independent registered public accounting firm.
We obtain these services from other service providers as needed.
(UNAUDITED,
NOT FORMING PART OF THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS)
The information furnished in the selected quarterly financial
data for the years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010 is
unaudited but includes all adjustments which, in the opinion of
management, are necessary for a fair statement of the financial
results of the respective interim periods. Such adjustments are
of a normal recurring nature. Interim financial statements are
by necessity somewhat tentative; judgments are used to estimate
interim amounts for items that are normally determinable only on
an annual basis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March 2011
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March 2010
|
|
|
|
By Quarter
|
|
|
By Quarter
|
|
(Millions of US dollars, except per
share data)
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
First
|
|
|
Second
|
|
|
Third
|
|
|
Fourth
|
|
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
318.4
|
|
|
$
|
287.6
|
|
|
$
|
272.6
|
|
|
$
|
288.4
|
|
|
$
|
284.5
|
|
|
$
|
304.2
|
|
|
$
|
261.0
|
|
|
$
|
274.9
|
|
Cost of goods sold
|
|
|
(201.6
|
)
|
|
|
(194.2
|
)
|
|
|
(187.8
|
)
|
|
|
(191.5
|
)
|
|
|
(174.1
|
)
|
|
|
(186.6
|
)
|
|
|
(164.3
|
)
|
|
|
(183.5
|
)
|
|
|
Gross profit
|
|
|
116.8
|
|
|
|
93.4
|
|
|
|
84.8
|
|
|
|
96.9
|
|
|
|
110.4
|
|
|
|
117.6
|
|
|
|
96.7
|
|
|
|
91.4
|
|
Operating income (loss)
|
|
|
127.0
|
|
|
|
(56.2
|
)
|
|
|
(16.9
|
)
|
|
|
50.8
|
|
|
|
(57.1
|
)
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
25.1
|
|
|
|
11.8
|
|
Interest expense
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.0
|
)
|
|
|
(3.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.5
|
)
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
Interest income
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
|
|
1.0
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Other (expense) income
|
|
|
(4.4
|
)
|
|
|
(2.9
|
)
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes
|
|
|
121.5
|
|
|
|
(60.0
|
)
|
|
|
(15.5
|
)
|
|
|
50.6
|
|
|
|
(53.0
|
)
|
|
|
(2.2
|
)
|
|
|
26.5
|
|
|
|
10.0
|
|
Income tax
expense1
|
|
|
(16.6
|
)
|
|
|
(363.7
|
)
|
|
|
(10.9
|
)
|
|
|
(52.4
|
)
|
|
|
(24.9
|
)
|
|
|
(17.4
|
)
|
|
|
(11.6
|
)
|
|
|
(12.3
|
)
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
104.9
|
|
|
$
|
(423.7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(26.4
|
)
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
|
|
(77.9
|
)
|
|
$
|
(19.6
|
)
|
|
$
|
14.9
|
|
|
$
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
Net income (loss) per share
basic
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
(0.97
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.04
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.03
|
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share
diluted
|
|
$
|
0.24
|
|
|
$
|
(0.97
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.06
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.04
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.18
|
)
|
|
$
|
(0.05
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.03
|
|
|
$
|
0.01
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
Includes non-cash charge of
US$345.2 million recognised in the second quarter of the
fiscal year ended 31 March 2011 related to the dismissal of
RCIs appeal of the 1999 disputed amended tax assessment.
Amount also includes a charge of US$32.6 million recognised
in the fourth quarter of the fiscal year ended 31 March
2011 related to our corporate structure simplification, as
announced on 17 May 2011, which will be paid during the
fiscal year ended 31 March 2012.
|
SECTION 3
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR SHAREHOLDERS
RISK FACTORS
Our business, operations and financial condition are subject to various risks and uncertainties. We
have described below significant factors that may adversely affect our business, operations,
financial performance and condition or industry. You should be aware that the occurrence of any of
the events described in the following risk factors, elsewhere in or incorporated by reference into
this report, and other events that we have not predicted or assessed, could have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
ASBESTOS RELATED RISKS
Our
wholly owned Australian subsidiary, James Hardie 117 Pty Ltd (which we refer to as the Performing Subsidiary), is required to make payments to a special purpose fund that provides
compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury and death claims for which certain
former companies of the James Hardie Group are found liable. These payments may affect our ability
to grow the Company.
On 21 November 2006, JHI SE (formerly JHI NV), the Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund (which we
refer to as the AICF), the Government of the State of New South Wales, Australia (which we refer
to as the NSW Government) and the Performing Subsidiary entered into an amended and restated Final
Funding Agreement (which we refer to as the AFFA) to provide long-term funding to the AICF, a
special purpose fund that provides compensation for Australian asbestos-related personal injury and
death claims for which certain former companies of the James Hardie Group, including ABN 60 Pty
Limited (which we refer to as ABN 60), Amaca Pty Ltd (which we refer to as Amaca) and Amaba Pty Ltd
(which we refer to as Amaba) (collectively, the Former James Hardie Companies) are found liable.
We have recorded an asbestos liability of US$1.7 billion in our consolidated financial statements
as of 31 March 2011, based on the AFFA governing our anticipated future payments to the AICF. The
initial funding payment of A$184.3 million (US$145.0 million at the time of payment) was made to
the AICF in February 2007 and annual payments will be made each July, subject to the terms of the
AFFA. The amounts of these annual payments are dependent on several factors, including our free
cash flow (as defined in the AFFA), actuarial estimations, actual claims paid, operating expenses
of the AICF and the annual cash flow cap. Further contributions of A$118.0 million (US$110.0
million) (including interest payments) and A$72.8 million (US$63.7 million) were made in fiscal
years 2009 and 2011, respectively. Under the terms of the AFFA, we were not required to make a
contribution to the AICF in fiscal years 2008 and 2010. We expect to make a contribution to the
AICF in fiscal year 2012 of approximately US$51.5 million. Our obligation to make future
contributions to the AICF continues to be linked under the terms of the AFFA to our long-term
financial success, especially our ability to generate net operating cash flow.
As a result of our obligation to make payments under the AFFA, our funds available for capital
expenditures (either with respect to our existing business or new business opportunities),
repayments of debt, payments of dividends or other distributions have been, and will be, reduced by
the amounts paid to the AICF, and consequently, our financial position, liquidity, results of
operations and cash flows have been, and will be, reduced or materially adversely affected. Our
obligation to make these payments could also affect or restrict our ability to access equity or
debt capital markets.
106
Potential escalation in proven claims made against, and associated costs of, the AICF could
increase our annual funding payments required to be made under the AFFA, which may cause us to have
to increase our asbestos liability in the future.
The amount of our asbestos liability is based, in part, on actuarially determined, anticipated
(estimated), future annual funding payments to be made to the AICF on an undiscounted and
uninflated basis. Future annual payments to the AICF are based on updated actuarial assessments
that are to be performed as of 31 March of each year to determine expected asbestos-related
personal injury and death claims to be funded under the AFFA for the financial year in which the
payment is made and the next two financial years. Estimates of actuarial liabilities are based on
many assumptions, which may not prove to be correct, and which are subject to considerable
uncertainty, since the ultimate number and cost of claims are subject to the outcome of events that
have not yet occurred, including social, legal and medical developments as well as future economic
conditions.
If future proven claims are more numerous, the liabilities arising from them are larger than that
currently estimated by the AICFs actuary (currently KPMG Actuarial Pty Limited, which we refer to
as KPMG Actuarial) or if the AICF investments decline in value, it is possible that pursuant to the
terms of the AFFA, we will be required to pay higher annual funding payments to the AICF than
currently anticipated and on which our asbestos liability is based. If this occurs, we may be
required to increase our asbestos liability which would be reflected as a charge in our
consolidated statements of operations at that date. Any such changes to actuarial estimates which
require us to increase our asbestos liability could have a material adverse effect on our financial
position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
Even though the AFFA has been implemented, we may be subject to potential additional liabilities
(including claims for compensation or property remediation outside the arrangements reflected in
the AFFA) because certain current and former companies of the James Hardie Group previously
manufactured products that contained asbestos.
Up to 1987, two former subsidiaries of ABN 60, Amaca and Amaba, which are now owned and controlled
by the AICF, manufactured products in Australia that contained asbestos. In addition, prior to
1937, ABN 60, which is also now owned and controlled by the AICF, manufactured products in
Australia that contained asbestos. ABN 60 also held shares in companies that manufactured
asbestos-containing products in Indonesia and Malaysia, and held minority shareholdings in
companies that conducted asbestos-mining operations based in Canada and Southern Africa. Former ABN
60 subsidiaries also exported asbestos-containing products to various countries. The AICF is
designed to provide compensation only for certain claims and to meet certain related expenses and
liabilities, and legislation in New South Wales, Australia in connection with the AFFA seeks to
defer all other claims against the Former James Hardie Companies. The funds contributed to the AICF
will not be available to meet any asbestos-related claims made outside Australia, or claims made
arising from exposure to asbestos occurring outside Australia, or any claim for pure property loss
or pure economic loss or remediation of property. In these circumstances, it is possible that
persons with such excluded claims may seek to pursue those claims directly against us. Defending
any such litigation could be costly and time consuming, and consequently, our financial position,
liquidity, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.
Prior to 1988, a New Zealand subsidiary in the James Hardie Group manufactured products in New
Zealand that contained asbestos. In New Zealand, asbestos-related disease compensation claims are
managed by the state-run Accident Compensation Corporation (which we refer to as the ACC). Our New
Zealand subsidiary that manufactured products that contained asbestos contributed financially to
the ACC fund as required by law via payment of an annual levy while it carried on business. All
decisions relating to the amount and allocation of payments to claimants in New Zealand are made by
the ACC in accordance with New Zealand law. The Injury Prevention, Rehabilitation and Compensation
Act 2001 (NZ) bars compensatory damages for claims that are covered by the legislation which may be
made against the ACC fund. However, we may be subject to potential liability if any of these claims
are found not to be covered by
107
the legislation and are later brought against us, and consequently, our financial position,
liquidity, results of operations and cash flows could be materially adversely affected.
Because our revenues are primarily derived from sales in US dollars and the actuarially assessed
asbestos liability is recorded in Australian dollars and payments pursuant to the AFFA are made in
Australian dollars, we may experience unpredictable volatility in our reported results due to
changes in the US dollar (and other currencies from which we derive our sales) compared to the
Australian dollar.
Payments pursuant to the AFFA are required to be made to the AICF in Australian dollars. In
addition, annual payments to the AICF are calculated based on various estimates that are
denominated in Australian dollars. To the extent that our future obligations exceed our Australian
dollar cash flows, and we do not hedge this foreign exchange exposure, we will need to convert US
dollars or other foreign currency into Australian dollars in order to meet our obligations pursuant
to the AFFA. As a result, any unfavourable fluctuations in the US dollar (the majority of our
revenues is derived from sales in US dollars) or other currencies against the Australian Dollar
could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations
and cash flows.
In addition, because our results of operations are reported in US dollars and the asbestos
liability is based on estimated payments denominated in Australian dollars, fluctuations in the
exchange rate will cause unpredictable volatility in our reported results for the foreseeable
future. For example, during fiscal years 2011 and 2010, we recorded an unfavourable impact of
US$107.3 million and US$220.9 million, respectively, due to fluctuations in the US dollar compared
to the Australian dollar. Any unfavourable fluctuation in US dollar and the other currencies from
which we derive our sales compared to the Australian dollar could have a material adverse effect on
our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
The AFFA imposes certain non-monetary obligations.
Under the AFFA, we are also subject to certain non-monetary obligations that could prove onerous or
otherwise materially adversely affect our ability to undertake proposed transactions or pay
dividends. For example, the AFFA contains certain restrictions that generally prohibit us from
undertaking transactions that would materially adversely affect the relative priority of the AICF
as a creditor, or that would materially impair our legal or financial capacity and that of the
Performing Subsidiary, in each case such that we and the Performing Subsidiary would cease to be
likely to be able to meet the funding obligations that would have arisen under the AFFA had the
relevant transaction not occurred. Those restrictions apply to dividends and other distributions,
reorganisations of, or dealings in, share capital which create or vest rights in such capital in
third parties, or non-arms length transactions. While the AFFA contains certain exemptions from
such restrictions (including, for example, exemptions for arms length dealings; transactions in
the ordinary course of business; certain issuances of equity securities or bonds; and certain
transactions provided certain financial ratios are met and certain amounts of dividends),
implementing such restrictions could materially adversely affect our ability to enter into
transactions that might otherwise be favourable to us and could materially adversely affect our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
108
The AFFA does not eliminate the risk of adverse action being taken against us.
There is a possibility that, despite certain covenants agreed to by the NSW Government in the AFFA,
adverse action could be directed against us by one or more of the NSW Government, the government of
the Commonwealth of Australia (which we refer to as the Australian Commonwealth Government),
governments of the other states or territories of Australia or any other governments, unions or
union representative groups, or asbestos disease groups with respect to the asbestos liabilities of
the Former James Hardie Companies or other current and former companies of the James Hardie Group.
Any such adverse action could materially adversely affect our financial position, liquidity,
results of operations and cash flows.
The complexity and long-term nature of the AFFA and related legislation and agreements may result
in litigation as to their interpretation.
Certain legislation, the AFFA and related agreements, which govern the implementation and
performance of the AFFA are complex and have been negotiated over the course of extended periods
between various parties. There is a risk that, over the term of the AFFA, some or all parties may
become involved in disputes as to the interpretation of such legislation, the AFFA or related
agreements. We cannot guarantee that no party will commence litigation seeking remedies with
respect to such a dispute, nor can we guarantee that a court will not order other remedies which
may materially adversely affect us.
There is no certainty that the NSW Government loan facility to the AICF will remain in place for
the entire term of the facility.
Drawings under the NSW Government loan facility to the AICF, as described in Note 11, are subject
to satisfaction of certain specified conditions precedent and the NSW Government (as lender) has
the right to cancel the loan facility, require repayment of money advanced and enforce security
granted to support the loan in the various circumstances prescribed in the loan facility agreement
and related security documentation. There are also certain positive covenants given by, and
restrictions on the activities of, the AICF and Former James Hardie Companies which apply during
the term of the loan. A breach of any of these covenants or restrictions may also lead to
cancellation of the facility, early repayment of the loan and/or enforcement of the security. As
such, there can be no certainty that the loan facility will remain in place for its intended term.
If the loan facility does not remain in place for its intended term, the AICF may experience a
short-term funding shortfall. A short-term funding shortfall for the AICF could subject us to
negative publicity. Such negative publicity could materially adversely affect our financial
position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows, employee morale and the market prices of
our publicly traded securities.
We may have insufficient Australian taxable income to utilise tax deductions.
We may not have sufficient Australian taxable income in future years to utilise the tax deductions
resulting from the funding payments under the AFFA to AICF. Further, if as a result of making such
funding payments we incur tax losses, we may not be able to fully utilise such tax losses in future
years of income. Any inability to utilise such deductions or losses could materially adversely
affect our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
109
Certain AFFA tax conditions may not be satisfied.
Despite the ATO rulings for the expected life of the AFFA, it is possible that new (and adverse)
tax legislation could be enacted in the future. It is also possible that the facts and
circumstances relevant to operation of the ATO rulings could change over the life of the AFFA. We
may elect to terminate the AFFA if certain tax conditions are not satisfied for more than 12
months. However, we do not have a right to terminate the AFFA if, among other things, the tax
conditions are not satisfied as a result of the actions of a member of the James Hardie Group.
Under certain circumstances, we may still have an obligation to make annual funding payments on an
adjusted basis if the tax conditions remain unsatisfied for more than 12 months. If the tax
conditions are not satisfied in a manner which does not permit us to terminate the AFFA, our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows may be materially adversely
affected. The extent of this adverse effect will be determined by the nature of the tax condition
which is not satisfied.
IRISH DOMICILE RELATED RISKS
In connection with transforming the Company to an Irish SE, we and certain of our subsidiaries
entered into an employee involvement agreement setting out the terms of future employee involvement
in JHI SE. There is a risk that our entry into the employee involvement agreement may result in a
material change to our governance or adversely affect our decision making process.
Under the SE Regulation and other relevant legislation, formation of an SE through merger requires
companies to enter into negotiations with a special negotiating body (which we refer to as the
SNB), made up of employee representatives in the European Economic Area (which we refer to as the
EEA) member states. As a result of the SNB process, we and certain of our subsidiaries have entered
into an agreement on the involvement of employees governing the provision of information to and
consultation with our European employees. The agreement generally provides that the management of
JHI SE and certain of our subsidiaries will provide information to our European employees regarding
certain matters both annually and as such matters may arise. The agreement also provides that we
will, subject to certain conditions, provide additional information and engage in a dialogue and
exchange of views with those European employees who express an interest in these communications in
a manner and with a content that allows those employees to express an opinion so that their opinion
may be taken into account in our decision-making process. We also have agreed that we will convene
a meeting with non-EEA member state employees to discuss information related to certain matters.
While we do not expect that the employee involvement agreement will result in a material change to
our governance or the way James Hardie runs its business, we have not operated under this type of
agreement before and there can be no assurance that it will not affect our governance or decision
making process. In addition, an adverse change in our governance or decision making process as a
result of the employee involvement agreement could for a period of time affect our results of
operations or the market price of our publicly traded securities.
110
The actual benefits that we realise as an Irish SE
could be materially different from our current
expectations.
The Re-domicile was designed to enable us to reorganise the
Company in a manner that would, among
other things, allow key senior managers with global responsibilities to spend more time with
management at our local operations and in our markets and provide more certainty to JHI SE
regarding its future tax obligations. In addition, the transformation was partly for the purpose of
increasing our future flexibility by becoming subject to Irish law. However, there can be no
assurance that the ability of our key senior managers with global responsibilities to spend more
time with local operations and in our markets will result in an improvement to our results of
operations, that the tax laws applicable to our operations will not adversely change in the future, that Irish law will
not become more restrictive or otherwise
disadvantageous or that changes to our governance structure and board composition will not
adversely affect us. A variety of other factors that are partially or entirely beyond our control
could cause the actual benefits that we realise as an Irish SE to be materially different from what
we currently expect.
Tax benefits are available under the US-Netherlands
Income Tax Treaty to US and Dutch taxpayers
that qualify for those benefits. In spite of a favourable settlement with the Appeals Division of
the Internal Revenue Service (which we refer to as the IRS) for calendar years 2006 and 2007, our
eligibility for continuing benefits under the US-Netherlands Tax Treaty is still undetermined for
2008 to 2010.
On 28 December 2004, the United States and The
Netherlands amended the US-Netherlands Income Tax
Treaty (prior to amendment, the Original US-NL Treaty; post amendment, the New US-NL Treaty).
We believe that, based on the transitional rules set forth in the New US-NL Treaty, the Original
US-NL Treaty applied to us and to our Dutch and US subsidiaries until 31 January 2006. We believe
that, under the limitation on benefits (which we refer to as the LOB) provision of the Original
US-NL Treaty, no US withholding tax applied to interest or royalties that our US subsidiaries paid
to our Dutch finance subsidiary. The LOB provision of the Original US-NL Treaty had various
conditions of eligibility for reduced US withholding tax rates and other treaty benefits, all of
which we satisfied. If, however, we do not qualify for benefits under the New US-NL Treaty, those
interest and royalty payments would be subject to a 30% US withholding tax.
Companies eligible for benefits under the New US-NL Treaty qualify for a zero percent US
withholding tax rate not only on interest and royalties but also, in certain circumstances, on
dividends. However, the LOB provision of the New US-NL Treaty has a number of new, more restrictive
eligibility requirements for eliminating or reducing US withholding taxes and for other treaty
benefits. We changed our organisational and operational structure as of 1 January 2006 to satisfy
the requirements of the LOB provision of the New US-NL Treaty and believe we are eligible for the
benefits of the New US-NL Treaty commencing 1 February 2006 until 29 June 2010, at which time we
became an Irish tax resident and eligible for benefits under the US-Ireland Income Tax Treaty (the
US-Ireland Treaty).
In spite of a favourable settlement with the Appeals Division of the IRS for calendar years 2006
and 2007, our eligibility for continuing benefits under the New US-NL Treaty is still undetermined
for 2008 and subsequent periods to 29 June 2010 (at which time we became an Irish tax resident and
eligible for benefits under the US-Ireland Treaty) because such eligibility is determined on an
annual basis. If during a subsequent tax audit or related process, the IRS determines that we are
not eligible for continuing benefits under the New US-NL Treaty, we may not qualify for treaty
benefits. As a result, our effective tax rate could significantly increase beginning in the fiscal
year that such determination is made and we could be liable for taxes owed for calendar year 2008
and subsequent periods to 29 June 2010, which could materially adversely affect our financial
position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
111
Tax benefits are available under the U.S.-Ireland Income Tax Treaty to US and Irish taxpayers that
qualify for those benefits. Our eligibility for benefits under the US-Ireland Tax Treaty is
determined on an annual basis and we could be audited by the IRS for this issue. If during a
subsequent tax audit or related process, the IRS determines that we are not eligible for benefits
under the US-Ireland Treaty, we may not qualify for treaty benefits. As a result, our effective tax
rate could significantly increase and we could be subject to a 30% US withholding tax rate on
payments of interest, royalties and dividends from our US subsidiaries to our Irish resident
subsidiaries.
In October 2009 we transferred our intellectual property and our treasury and finance operations to
Irish resident subsidiaries. We believe that interest and royalties paid by our US subsidiaries to
these Irish resident subsidiaries qualify for treaty benefits in the form of reduced withholding
tax under the US-Ireland Income Tax Treaty (which we refer to as the U.S.-Ireland Treaty). For the
period between the incorporation of these subsidiaries until the date that we became a tax resident
in Ireland, under provisions of the US-Ireland Treaty, our Irish subsidiaries qualified for treaty benefits under the derivative
benefits clause so long as we were also eligible for treaty benefits under the amended US-NL
Income Tax Treaty.
We believe that, under the LOB provision of the US-Ireland Treaty, no US withholding tax applies to
interest or royalties that our US subsidiaries paid to our Irish resident subsidiaries. The LOB
provision has various conditions of eligibility for reduced US withholding tax rates and other
treaty benefits, all of which we believe are satisfied. If, however, we do not qualify for benefits
under the US-Ireland Treaty, those interest and royalty payments would be subject to a 30% US
withholding tax.
With effect from 29 June 2010 forward (i.e., the date upon which we became an Irish tax resident),
we believe that, under the US-Ireland Treaty, a 5% US withholding tax applies to dividends paid by
our US subsidiaries to our Irish resident subsidiaries. The LOB provision of the US-Ireland Treaty
has various conditions of eligibility for reduced US withholding tax rates and other treaty
benefits, all of which we believe we have satisfied. If, however, we do not qualify for benefits
under the US-Ireland Treaty, dividend payments by our US subsidiaries would be subject to a 30% US
withholding rate.
Our eligibility for benefits under the US-Ireland Tax Treaty is determined on an annual basis and
we could be audited by the IRS for this issue. If during a subsequent tax audit or related process,
the IRS determines that we are not eligible for benefits under the US-Ireland Treaty, we may not
qualify for treaty benefits. As a result, our effective tax rate could significantly increase
beginning in the fiscal year that such determination is made and we could be liable for taxes owing
for calendar year 2010 and subsequent periods, which could materially adversely affect our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
112
Irish law contains provisions that could delay or prevent a change of control that may otherwise be
beneficial to you.
Irish law contains several provisions that could have the effect of delaying or preventing a change
of control of our ownership. The Irish Takeover Rules generally prohibit the acquisition of shares
of our common stock if, because of an acquisition of a relevant interest (including interests held
in the form of shares of our common stock, CUFS or ADSs) in such shares, the voting rights of the
shares in which a person (or persons acting in concert) holds relevant interests increases (i) from
30% or below to over 30% or (ii) from a starting point that is above 30% and below 50%. However,
this prohibition is subject to exceptions, including acquisitions that result from acceptances
under a mandatory takeover bid made in compliance with the Irish Takeover Rules. Although the Irish
Takeover Rules may help to ensure that no person acquires voting control of us without making an
offer to all shareholders, they may also have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of
control that may otherwise be beneficial to you.
Our ability to pay dividends and conduct share buy-backs is dependent on Irish law and may be
limited in the future if we are not able to maintain sufficient levels of Freely Distributable
Reserves (which we refer to as FDRs).
Under Irish corporate law, an Irish company is able to pay dividends and/or conduct a buy-back of
shares up to the amount of its FDRs which are determined under applicable accounting practices
generally accepted in Ireland (which we refer to as Irish GAAP). We believe that our current
corporate structure has allowed us to maintain sufficient levels of FDRs to continue paying
dividends in accordance with our publicly disclosed dividend policy, which is updated from time to
time, and to conduct share buy-backs as announced in May 2011. However, transactions or events
could cause a reduction in our FDRs, resulting in our inability to pay dividends on our securities
or to conduct share buy-backs, which could have a material adverse impact on the market value of
the securities that you have invested in.
113
TAXATION RELATED RISKS
Our effective income tax rate could increase and materially adversely affect our business.
We operate in multiple jurisdictions and pay tax on our income according to the tax laws of these
jurisdictions. Various factors, some of which are beyond our control, determine our effective tax
rate. The primary drivers of our effective tax rate are the tax rates of the jurisdictions in
which we operate, the level and geographic mix of pre-tax earnings, intra-group royalties, interest
rates and the level of debt which give rise to interest expense on external debt and intra-group
debt, extraordinary and non-core items, and the value of adjustments for timing differences and
permanent differences, including the non-deductibility of certain expenses, all of which are
subject to change and which could result in a material increase in our effective tax rate. Such
changes to our effective tax rate could materially adversely affect our financial position,
liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
Exposure to additional tax liabilities due to audits could materially adversely affect our
business.
Due to our size and the nature of our business, we are subject to ongoing reviews by authorities in
taxing jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to various positions we assert on
our income tax and withholding tax returns. We accrue for tax contingencies based upon our best
estimate of the taxes ultimately expected to be paid, which we update over time as more information
becomes available. Such amounts are included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities, as
appropriate. We record additional tax expense in the period in which we determine that the recorded
tax liability is less than the ultimate assessment we expect. The amounts ultimately paid on
resolution of reviews by taxing jurisdictions could be materially different from the amounts
included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities and result in additional tax expense
which could materially adversely affect our financial position, liquidity, results of operations
and cash flows.
Our wholly-owned subsidiary, RCI Pty Ltd (which we refer to as RCI) may lose its appeal of a
Federal Court judgment upholding an assessment by the ATO.
In March 2006, RCI received an amended assessment from the ATO in respect of RCIs income tax
return for the year ended 31 March 1999. On 30 May 2007, the ATO issued a Notice of Decision
disallowing the Companys objection to the amended assessment (which we refer to as the Objection
Decision). On 11 July 2007, we filed an application appealing the Objection Decision with the
Federal Court of Australia. The matter was heard before the Federal Court in September 2009 and on
1 September 2010, the Federal Court dismissed RCIs appeal.
Prior to the Federal Courts decision on RCIs appeal, we believed it was more-likely-than-not that
the tax position reported in RCIs tax return for the 1999 fiscal year would be upheld on appeal.
As a result, until 31 August 2010, we treated the payment of 50% of the amended assessment, general
interest charges (which we refer to as GIC) and interest accrued on amounts paid to the ATO with
respect to the amended assessment as a deposit on our consolidated balance sheet.
As a result of the Federal Courts decision, we re-assessed our tax position with respect to the
amended assessment and concluded that the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold as
prescribed by US GAAP was no longer met. Accordingly, with effect from 1 September 2010, we removed
the deposit with the ATO from our consolidated balance sheet and recognised a non-cash expense of
US$345.2 million (A$388.0 million) on our consolidated statement of operations for the year ended
31 March 2011. In addition, we recognised an uncertain tax position of US$190.4 million (A$184.3
million) on our consolidated balance sheet relating to the unpaid portion of the amended
assessment.
RCI strongly disputes the amended assessment and is pursuing an appeal of the Federal Courts
judgment. RCIs appeal was heard from 16 May 2011 to 18 May 2011 before the Full Federal Court of
114
Australia.
Judgment has been reserved. If RCI is ultimately unsuccessful in appealing the amended assessment, RCI will be
required to pay the unpaid portion of the amended assessment. As a result, our financial position,
liquidity, results of operations and cash flows would be materially and adversely affected.
The ATO was awarded costs in connection with RCIs appeal of the Objection Decision. The Company
has recorded a reserve for such costs within Other Non-Current Liabilities on the Companys
consolidated balance sheet at 31 March 2011. Amounts paid to the ATO could have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
OTHER RISKS
Our business is dependent on the residential and commercial construction markets.
Demand for our products depends in large part on the residential construction markets and, to a
lesser extent, on commercial construction markets. The level of activity in residential
construction markets depends on new housing starts and residential remodeling projects, which are a
function of many factors outside our control, including general economic conditions, the
availability of financing, mortgage and other interest rates, inflation, unemployment, the
inventory of unsold homes, the level of foreclosures, home resale rates, housing affordability,
demographic trends, gross domestic product growth and consumer confidence in each of the countries
and regions in which we operate.
Any further slowdown in the markets we serve could result in decreased demand for our products and
cause us to experience decreased sales and operating income. In addition, further deterioration or
continued weaknesses in general economic conditions, such as higher interest rates, continued high
levels of unemployment, continued restrictive lending practices and increased number of
foreclosures could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of
operations and cash flows.
Substantial and increasing competition in the building products industry could materially adversely
affect our business.
Competition in the building products industry is based largely on price, quality, performance and
service. Our fibre cement products compete with products manufactured from natural and engineered
wood, vinyl, stucco, masonry, gypsum and other materials as well as fibre cement products offered
by other manufacturers. Some of our competitors may have greater product diversity and greater
financial and other resources than we do and, among other factors, may be less affected by
reductions in margins resulting from price competition.
Increased competition in any of the markets in which we compete would likely cause pricing
pressures in those markets. Any of these factors could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
We rely on only a few customers to buy our fibre cement products and the loss of any major customer
could materially adversely affect our business.
Our largest four customers in the US represented approximately 56% of our total USA and Europe
Fibre Cement gross sales in fiscal year 2011. Our largest customer in Australia accounted for
approximately 12% of our total gross sales in Asia Pacific Fibre Cement in fiscal year 2011. We
generally do not have long-term contracts with our large customers. Accordingly, if we were to lose
one or more of these customers because our competitors were able to offer customers more favourable
pricing terms or for any other reason, we may not be able to replace customers in a timely manner
or on reasonable terms. The loss of one or more of our large customers could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
115
Regulatory action and continued scrutiny may have an adverse effect on our business.
Our compliance with laws and regulations can be subject to future government review and
interpretation. If we fail to comply with applicable laws and regulations, we could be subject to
fines, penalties, or other legal liability. Also, should these laws and regulations be amended or
expanded, or should new laws and regulations be enacted, we could incur additional compliance costs
or restrictions on our ability to manufacture our products and operate our business. Furthermore,
our failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in additional costs, fees or
reporting requirements as well as significant regulatory action including fines, penalties and
legal defense costs, and could subject us to negative publicity. Such actions could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Our transformation to an Irish SE in June 2010 could also result in increased negative publicity
related to the Company. There continues to be negative publicity regarding, and criticism of,
companies that conduct substantial business in the US but are domiciled in foreign countries. We
cannot assure you that we will not be subject to similar criticism. We previously have been the
subject of significant negative publicity in connection with the events that were considered by the
SCI and the ASIC proceedings in Australia, which we believe has in the past contributed to declines
in the price of our publicly traded securities.
We believe that any such adverse action or negative publicity could materially adversely affect our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows, employee morale and the market
prices of our publicly traded securities.
Uncertainty exists surrounding the amount of losses and expense arising from the ASIC proceedings.
On 17 December 2010, the New South Wales Court of Appeal dismissed our appeal against Justice
Gzells judgment and ASICs cross appeals against the appellants and ordered that we pay 90% of the
costs incurred by ASIC in connection with our appeal.
The amount of costs we may be required to pay to ASIC in respect of the first instance and appeal
proceedings is contingent on a number of factors, which include, without limitation, what costs are
properly allocated and attributable to the issues pursued by ASIC against us and what costs could
be deemed to be valid and reasonable taking into account the number of legal practitioners involved
and their applicable fees rates.
In light of the uncertainty surrounding the amount of such costs, we have not recorded any
provision for these costs at 31 March 2011. Losses and expenses arising from the ASIC proceedings
could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations
and cash flows.
ASIC subsequently filed applications for special leave to the High Court appealing the Court of
Appeals judgment in favour of the former directors appeals. Certain former officers have also
filed special leave applications to the High Court. The High Court granted ASICs application for
special leave on 13 May 2011. The High Court granted the special leave applications for one of the
former executives, and the other former executive withdrew his application.
As with the first instance proceedings, we will pay a portion of the costs of bringing and
defending appeals, with the remaining costs being met by third parties, including former directors
and executives, in accordance with the terms of their applicable indemnities. It is our policy to
expense legal costs as incurred. In fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, we had net
(recoveries)/expense of US$(8.7) million, US$3.4 million and US$14.0 million, respectively, related
to the ASIC proceedings and appeals. Fiscal year 2011 includes recoveries from third parties of
US$10.3 million related to the costs of the ASIC proceedings for certain of the ten former
officers and directors. Our net costs in relation to the ASIC proceedings and appeals from February
2007 to 31 March 2011 totaled US$14.4 million.
116
Because we have significant operations outside of the United States and report our earnings in US
dollars, unfavourable fluctuations in currency values and exchange rates could have a material
adverse effect on our business.
Because our reporting currency is the US dollar, our non-US operations face the additional risk of
fluctuating currency values and exchange rates. Such operations may also face hard currency
shortages and controls on currency exchange. Approximately 32%, 28% and 24% of our net sales in
fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively, were derived from sales outside the United States.
Consequently, changes in the value of foreign currencies (principally Australian dollars, New
Zealand dollars, Philippine pesos, Euros, U.K. pounds and Canadian dollars) could materially affect
our business, results of operations and financial condition. We generally attempt to mitigate
foreign exchange risk by entering into contracts that require payment in local currency, hedging
transactional risk, where appropriate, and having non-US operations borrow in local currencies.
Although, we may enter into such financial instruments from time to time to manage our foreign
exchange risks, we did not have any material forward exchange contracts outstanding as of 31 March
2011 There can be no assurance that we will be successful in these mitigation strategies, or that
fluctuations in foreign currencies and other foreign exchange risks will not have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
If damages resulting from product defects exceed our insurance coverage, paying these damages could
result in a material adverse effect on our business.
The actual or alleged existence of defects in any of our products could subject us to significant
product liability claims, including potential putative class action claims. Although we do not have
replacement insurance coverage for damage to, or defects in, our products, we do have product
liability insurance coverage for consequential damages that may arise from the use of our products.
Although we believe this coverage is adequate and currently intend to maintain this coverage in the
future, we cannot assure you that this coverage will be sufficient to cover all future product
liability claims or that this coverage will be available at reasonable rates in the future. The
successful assertion of one or more claims against us that exceed our insurance coverage could
require us to incur significant expenses to pay these damages. These additional expenses could have
a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash
flows.
Warranty claims relating to our products and exceeding our warranty reserves could have a material
adverse effect on our business.
We have offered, and continue to offer, various warranties on our products, including a 30-year
limited warranty for certain of our fibre cement siding products in the United States. In total, as
of 31 March 2011, we have accrued US$26.2 million for such warranties within Accrued product
warranties on our consolidated balance sheets and have disclosed the movements in our consolidated
warranty reserves within Note 10 to our consolidated financial statements in Section 2.
Although we maintain reserves for warranty-related claims and legal proceedings that we
believe are adequate, we cannot assure you that warranty expense levels or the results of any
warranty-related legal proceedings will not exceed our reserves. If our warranty reserves are
significantly exceeded, the costs associated with such warranties could have a material adverse
effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
We may incur significant costs,
including capital expenditures,
in the future in complying with applicable environmental and health
and safety laws and regulations.
In all the jurisdictions in which we operate, we are subject to environmental, health and safety
laws and regulations governing, among other matters, our operations, including the air, soil, and
water quality of our plants, and the use, handling, storage, disposal and remediation of hazardous
substances currently or formerly used by us or any of our affiliates. Under these laws and
regulations, we may be held jointly and severally responsible for the remediation of any hazardous
substance contamination at our or our
117
predecessors past or present facilities and at third-party waste disposal sites. We may also be
held liable for any claims, penalties or fines arising out of human exposure to hazardous
substances or other environmental damage, including damage to natural resources, and our failure to
comply with air, water, waste, and other environmental regulations.
In addition, many of our products contain crystalline silica, which can be released in a respirable
form in connection with manufacturing practices and handling or use. The inhalation of respirable
crystalline silica at high and prolonged exposure levels is known or suspected to be associated
with silicosis and has been the subject of extensive tort litigation. We may face future costs of
engineering and compliance to meet new standards relating to crystalline silica if standards are
heightened. In addition, there is a risk that claims for silica-related health effects could be
made against us. We cannot assure you that we will have adequate resources, including adequate
insurance coverage, to satisfy any future silica-related health effect claims. In addition, our
sales could decrease if silica-related health effect claims are made against us and as a result,
potential users of our products may decide not to use our products. Any such claims may have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
The costs of complying with environmental and health and safety laws relating to our operations or
the liabilities arising from past or future releases of, or exposure to, hazardous substances,
greenhouse gases, or product liability matters, or our failure to comply with air, water, waste,
and other than existing environmental regulations may result in us making future expenditures that
could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations
and cash flows. Such regulations and laws may increase the cost of energy or other products
necessary to our operation, thereby increasing our operating costs. In addition, we cannot make any
assurances that the laws currently in place that directly or indirectly relate to environmental
liability will not change. If, for example, applicable laws or judicial interpretations related to
successor liability or piercing the corporate veil were to change, it could have a material
adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
We may experience adverse fluctuations in the supply and cost of raw materials and energy supply
necessary to our business which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Cellulose fibre (wood-based pulp), silica, cement and water are the principal raw materials used in
the production of fibre cement, and the availability and cost of such raw materials are critical to
our operations. Our fibre cement business periodically experiences fluctuations in the supply and
costs of raw materials, and some of our supply markets are concentrated. In fiscal year 2011, the
average Northern Bleached Softwood Kraft (which we refer to as NBSK) pulp price was US$978 per ton,
an increase of 30% compared to fiscal year 2010. NBSK pulp prices are forecasted to remain at or
above US$1,000 per ton.
Freight costs in the US were also higher in fiscal year 2011 compared to the prior year. Freight
costs are expected to rise reflecting supply constraints for trucks, as the broader economy
improves and the cost of fuel remains high.
Price fluctuations or material delays may occur in the future due to lack of raw materials,
suppliers, or supply chain disruptions. The loss or deterioration of our relationship with a major
supplier, an increase in demand by third parties for a particular suppliers products or materials,
delays in obtaining materials, or significant increases in fuel and energy costs could have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
Demand for our products is subject to changes in consumer preference.
The continued development of builder and consumer preference for our fibre cement products over
competitive products is critical to sustaining and expanding demand for our products. Therefore,
the failure to maintain and increase builder and consumer acceptance of our fibre cement products
could have a material adverse effect on our growth strategy, as well as our financial position,
liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
118
Our ability to sell our products into certain markets is influenced by building codes and
ordinances in effect in the related localities and states and may limit our ability to compete
effectively in certain markets and our ability to increase or maintain our current market share for
our products.
Most states and localities in the markets in which we sell our products maintain building codes and
ordinances that determine the requisite qualities of materials that may be used to construct homes
and buildings for which our products are intended. Our products may not qualify under building
codes and ordinances in certain markets, prohibiting our customers from using our products in those
markets. This may limit our ability to sell our products into certain markets. In addition,
ordinances and codes may change over time which may, from the time they are implemented,
prospectively limit or prevent the use of our products in those markets, causing us to lose market
share for our products. Although we keep up-to-date on the current and proposed building codes and
ordinances of the markets in which we sell or plan to sell our products and, when appropriate, seek
to become involved in the ordinance and code setting process, our efforts may be ineffective, which
would have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, liquidity, results of operations
and cash flows.
Our financial performance could be impacted by a customers inability to pay amounts owed.
Our financial performance is dependent on our customers within the building products industry. Our
customers businesses have been impacted by the current economic environment, disruptions to the
capital and credit markets and decreased demand for their products and services. If any of our
largest customers or a substantial number of smaller customers are adversely affected by these
conditions, if we become aware of information related to the credit worthiness of a major customer,
or if future actual default rates on receivables in general differ from those currently
anticipated, we may have to adjust the reserves for uncollectible receivables, which could have a
material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
Our reliance on third party distribution channels could impact our business.
We offer our products directly and through a variety of third party distributors and dealers.
Changes in the financial or business condition of these distributors and dealers could subject the
Company to losses and affect its ability to bring our products to market and could have a material
adverse effect on our business, financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash
flows.
Changes in, or failure to comply with, the laws, regulations, policies or conditions of any
jurisdiction in which we conduct our business could result in, among other consequences, the loss
of our assets in such jurisdiction, the elimination of certain rights that are critical to the
operation of our business in such jurisdiction, a decrease in revenues or the imposition of
additional taxes or other costs.
Because we own assets, manufacture and sell our products internationally, our activities are
subject to political, economic, legal and other uncertainties, including:
|
|
|
changing political and economic conditions; |
|
|
|
|
changing laws and policies; |
|
|
|
|
the general hazards associated with the assertion of sovereign rights over certain areas
in which we conduct our business; and |
|
|
|
|
laws limiting or conditioning the right and ability of subsidiaries and joint ventures
to pay dividends or remit earnings to affiliated companies. |
Although we seek to take applicable laws, regulations and conditions into account in structuring
our business on a global basis, changes in, or our failure to comply with, the laws, regulations,
policies or conditions of any jurisdiction in which we conduct our business could result in, among
other
119
consequences, the loss of our assets in such jurisdiction, the elimination of certain rights that
are critical to the operation of our business in such jurisdiction, a decrease in revenues or the
imposition of additional taxes. Therefore, any change in laws, regulations, policies or conditions
of a jurisdiction could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity,
results of operations and cash flows.
Because our intellectual property and other proprietary information may become publicly available,
we are subject to the risk that competitors could copy our products or processes.
Our success depends, in part, on the proprietary nature of our technology, including non-patentable
intellectual property such as our process technology. To the extent that a competitor is able to
reproduce or otherwise capitalise on our technology, it may be difficult, expensive or impossible
for us to obtain adequate legal or equitable relief. Also, the laws of some foreign countries may
not protect our intellectual property to the same extent as do the laws of the United States. In
addition to patent protection of intellectual property rights, we consider elements of our product
designs and processes to be proprietary and confidential and/or trade secrets. To safeguard our
confidential information, we rely on employee, consultant and vendor non-disclosure agreements and
contractual provisions and a system of internal and technical safeguards to protect our proprietary
information. However, any of our registered or unregistered intellectual property rights may be
challenged or exploited by others in the industry, which could materially adversely affect our
financial position, liquidity, results of operations, cash flows and competitive position.
Severe weather, natural disasters and climate conditions could have an adverse effect on our
overall business.
Our plants and other facilities are located in places that could be affected by natural disasters,
such as hurricanes, typhoons, cyclones, earthquakes, floods, tornados and other natural disasters.
Natural disasters and widespread adverse climate changes that directly impact our plants or other
facilities could materially adversely affect our manufacturing or other operations and, thereby,
harm our overall financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
In the manufacture of our products, we rely on a continuous and uninterrupted supply of electric
power, water and, in some cases, natural gas, as well as the availability of water, waste and
emissions discharge facilities. Any future shortages or discharge curtailments, of a material
nature, could significantly disrupt our operations and increase our expenses. We currently do not
have backup generators on our sites with the capability of maintaining all of a sites full
operational power needs and we do not have alternate sources of power in the event of a sustained
blackout. While our insurance includes coverage for certain business interruption losses (i.e.,
lost profits) and for certain service interruption losses, such as an accident at our suppliers
facility, any losses in excess of the insurance policys coverage limits or any losses not covered
by the terms of the insurance policy could have a material adverse effect on our financial
condition. If blackouts interrupt our power supply, we would be temporarily unable to continue
operations at the affected facilities. Any future material and sustained interruptions in our
ability to continue operations at our facilities could damage our reputation, harm our ability to
retain existing customers or obtain new customers and could result in lost revenue, any of which
could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, liquidity, results of operations
and cash flows.
In the future, we may be unable to renew our credit facilities on their current terms or terms that
are customary for other companies in our industry or who have similar credit ratings, or be able to
obtain any alternative or additional financing arrangements.
In the future, we may not be able to renew credit facilities on substantially similar terms, or at
all; we may have to pay additional fees and expenses that we might not have to pay under current
circumstances; and we may have to agree to terms that could increase the cost of our debt
facilities. If we are unable to renew our credit facilities on terms which are not materially less
favourable than the terms currently available to us or obtain alternative or additional financing
arrangements, we may experience liquidity issues and will have to reduce our levels of planned
capital expenditures, suspend dividend payments and/or share buy-
120
back programs or take other measures to conserve cash in order to meet our future cash flow
requirements.
Ineffective internal controls over financial reporting could impact our business and operating
results.
Our internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements because of
its inherent limitations, including the possibility of human error, the circumvention or overriding
of controls, or fraud. Even effective internal controls can provide only reasonable assurance with
respect to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements. If we fail to maintain
the adequacy of internal controls, our business and operating results could be harmed and we could
fail to meet our financial reporting obligations.
Our use of accounting estimates involves judgment and could impact our financial results.
Our most critical accounting estimates are described in Note 2 to our consolidated financial
statements in Section 2. In addition, as discussed in Note 10, Product Warranties and Note 13,
Contingencies and Commitments to our consolidated financial statements in Section 2, we make
certain estimates including decisions related to legal proceedings and warranty reserves. Because
by definition these estimates and assumptions involve the use of judgment, actual financial results
may differ.
We may acquire or divest businesses from time to time, and this may materially adversely affect our
results of operations and financial condition and may significantly change the nature of the
company in which you have invested.
In the past, we have divested business segments. In the future, we may acquire other businesses or
sell some or all of our assets or business segments. Any significant acquisition or sale may
materially adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition and could change the
overall profile of our business. As a result, the value of our shares may decrease in response to
any such acquisition or sale and, upon any such acquisition or sale, our shares may represent an
investment in a company with significantly different assets and prospects from the Company when you
made your initial investment in us.
We are dependent upon our key management personnel for our future success.
Our success is greatly influenced by our ability to attract and retain qualified executives with
experience in our market and industry. Our ability to retain executive officers and key management
personnel is important to the implementation of our strategy. We could potentially lose the
services of any of our senior management personnel due to a variety of factors that could include,
without limitation, death, incapacity, personal issues, retirement, resignation, or competing
employers. We may fail to attract and retain qualified key management personnel required to
continue to operate our business successfully. The unexpected loss of senior management, coupled
with our failure to recruit qualified successors, could have a material adverse effect on our
business and the trading price of our common stock.
COMMITMENT TO PROVIDE FUNDING ON A LONG-TERM BASIS IN RESPECT OF ASBESTOS-RELATED LIABILITIES OF
FORMER SUBSIDIARIES
The AFFA to provide long-term funding to the AICF was approved by shareholders in February 2007.
The accounting policies utilised by us to account for the AFFA are described in Note 2 to our
consolidated financial statements in Section 2.
121
Asbestos Adjustments
The asbestos adjustments included in the consolidated statements of operations comprise the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March |
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Change in estimates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in actuarial estimate asbestos liability |
|
$ |
9.8 |
|
|
$ |
(3.8 |
) |
|
$ |
(180.9 |
) |
Change in actuarial estimate insurance receivable |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
1.9 |
|
|
|
19.8 |
|
Change in estimate AICF claims handling costs |
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
|
(1.4 |
) |
|
|
(1.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal Change in estimates |
|
|
21.5 |
|
|
|
(3.3 |
) |
|
|
(162.3 |
) |
(Loss) gain on foreign currency exchange |
|
|
(107.3 |
) |
|
|
(220.9 |
) |
|
|
179.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Asbestos Adjustments |
|
$ |
(85.8 |
) |
|
$ |
(224.2 |
) |
|
$ |
17.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
122
Asbestos-Related Assets and Liabilities
Under the terms of the AFFA, we have included on our consolidated balance sheets certain
asbestos-related assets and liabilities. These amounts are detailed in the table below, and the net
total of these asbestos-related assets and liabilities is commonly referred to by us as the Net
AFFA Liability.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March |
|
(Millions of US dollars) |
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
Asbestos liability current |
|
$ |
(111.1 |
) |
|
$ |
(106.7 |
) |
Asbestos liability non-current |
|
|
(1,587.0 |
) |
|
|
(1,512.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos liability Total |
|
|
(1,698.1 |
) |
|
|
(1,619.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance receivable current |
|
|
13.7 |
|
|
|
16.7 |
|
Insurance receivable non-current |
|
|
188.6 |
|
|
|
185.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance receivable Total |
|
|
202.3 |
|
|
|
201.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workers compensation asset current |
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Workers compensation asset non-current |
|
|
90.4 |
|
|
|
98.8 |
|
Workers compensation liability current |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Workers compensation liability non-current |
|
|
(90.4 |
) |
|
|
(98.8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workers compensation Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes current |
|
|
10.5 |
|
|
|
16.4 |
|
Deferred income taxes non-current |
|
|
451.4 |
|
|
|
420.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred income taxes Total |
|
|
461.9 |
|
|
|
436.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax payable |
|
|
18.6 |
|
|
|
16.5 |
|
Other net liabilities |
|
|
(1.3 |
) |
|
|
(1.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net AFFA liability |
|
|
(1,016.6 |
) |
|
|
(966.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents and
restricted short-term investment assets of the
AICF |
|
|
61.9 |
|
|
|
57.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unfunded Net AFFA liability |
|
$ |
(954.7 |
) |
|
$ |
(908.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos Liability
The amount of the asbestos liability reflects the terms of the AFFA, which has been calculated by
reference to (but is not exclusively based upon) the most recent actuarial estimate of the
projected future asbestos-related cash flows prepared by KPMG Actuarial. The asbestos liability
also includes an allowance for the future claims-handling costs of the AICF. We receive an updated
actuarial estimate as of 31 March each year. The last actuarial assessment was performed as of 31
March 2011.
123
The changes in the asbestos liability for the year ended 31 March 2011 are detailed in the table
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$ |
|
|
A$ to |
|
|
US$ |
|
|
|
Millions |
|
|
US$ rate |
|
|
Millions |
|
Asbestos liability 31 March 2010 |
|
A$ |
(1,768.0 |
) |
|
|
1.0919 |
|
|
$ |
(1,619.2 |
) |
Asbestos claims paid (1) |
|
|
100.6 |
|
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
95.0 |
|
AICF claims-handling costs incurred (1) |
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
Change in actuarial estimate (2) |
|
|
9.5 |
|
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
|
9.8 |
|
Change in estimate of AICF claims-handling costs (2) |
|
|
11.8 |
|
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
Loss on foreign currency exchange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(198.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asbestos liability 31 March 2011 |
|
A$ |
(1,643.1 |
) |
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
$ |
(1,698.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The average exchange rate for the period is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to
US dollars based on the assumption that these transactions occurred evenly throughout the
period. |
|
(2) |
|
The spot exchange rate at 31 March 2011 is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to US
dollars as the adjustment to the estimate was made on that date. |
Insurance Receivable Asbestos
The changes in the insurance receivable for the year ended 31 March 2011 are detailed in the table
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$ |
|
|
A$ to |
|
|
US$ |
|
|
|
Millions |
|
|
US$ rate |
|
|
Millions |
|
Insurance receivable 31 March 2010 |
|
A$ |
220.3 |
|
|
|
1.0919 |
|
|
$ |
201.8 |
|
Insurance recoveries (1) |
|
|
(24.1 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(22.9 |
) |
Change in actuarial estimate (2) |
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
|
(0.5 |
) |
Gain on foreign currency exchange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance receivable 31 March 2011 |
|
A$ |
195.7 |
|
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
$ |
202.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The average exchange rate for the period is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to
US dollars based on the assumption that these transactions occurred evenly throughout the
period. |
|
(2) |
|
The spot exchange rate at 31 March 2011 is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to US
dollars as the adjustment to the estimate was made on that date. |
Deferred Income Taxes Asbestos
The changes in the deferred income taxes asbestos for the year ended 31 March 2011 are detailed
in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$ |
|
|
A$ to US$ |
|
|
US$ |
|
|
|
Millions |
|
|
rate |
|
|
Millions |
|
Deferred tax assets 31 March 2010 |
|
A$ |
476.5 |
|
|
|
1.0919 |
|
|
$ |
436.4 |
|
Amounts offset against income tax payable (1) |
|
|
(22.3 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(21.1 |
) |
AICF earnings (1) |
|
|
(7.3 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(6.9 |
) |
Gain on foreign currency exchange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
53.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets 31 March 2011 |
|
A$ |
446.9 |
|
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
$ |
461.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The average exchange rate for the period is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to
US dollars based on the assumption that these transactions occurred evenly throughout the
period. |
Income Taxes Payable
124
A portion of the deferred income tax asset is applied against our income tax payable. At 31 March
2011 and 2010, this amount was US$21.1 million and US$15.3 million, respectively. During the year
ended 31 March 2011, there was a US$2.1 million favourable effect of foreign currency exchange.
Other Net Liabilities
Other net liabilities include a provision for asbestos-related education and medical research
contributions of US$2.5 million and $2.6 million at 31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively. Also
included in other net liabilities are the other assets and liabilities of the AICF including trade
receivables, prepayments, fixed assets, trade payables and accruals.
These other assets and liabilities of the AICF were a net asset of US$1.3 million and US$0.9
million at 31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively. During the year ended 31 March 2011, there was a
US$0.1 million net favourable effect of foreign currency exchange on the other net liabilities.
Restricted Cash and Short-term Investments of the AICF
Cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments of the AICF are reflected as restricted assets
as these assets are restricted for use in the settlement of asbestos claims and payment of the
operating costs of the AICF.
At 31 March 2011, we revalued the AICFs remaining short-term investments available-for-sale
resulting in a positive mark-to-market fair value adjustment of US$1.3 million. This appreciation
in the value of the investments was recorded as an unrealised gain in Other Comprehensive Income.
The changes in the restricted cash and short-term investments of the AICF for the year ended 31
March 2011 are detailed in the table below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A$ |
|
|
A$ to US$ |
|
|
US$ |
|
|
|
Millions |
|
|
rate |
|
|
Millions |
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents and restricted
short-term investments 31 March 2010 |
|
A$ |
63.1 |
|
|
|
1.0919 |
|
|
$ |
57.8 |
|
Asbestos claims paid (1) |
|
|
(100.6 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(95.0 |
) |
Payments received in accordance with AFFA (2) |
|
|
72.8 |
|
|
|
1.1430 |
|
|
|
63.7 |
|
AICF operating costs paid claims handling (1) |
|
|
(2.9 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(2.8 |
) |
AICF operating costs paid non-claims handling (1) |
|
|
(2.3 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
Insurance recoveries (1) |
|
|
24.1 |
|
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
22.9 |
|
Interest and investment income (1) |
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
Unrealised gain on investments (1) |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Other (1) |
|
|
(0.2 |
) |
|
|
1.0584 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Gain on foreign currency exchange |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Restricted cash and cash equivalents and
restricted short-term investments 31 March
2011 |
|
A$ |
59.9 |
|
|
|
0.9676 |
|
|
$ |
61.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The average exchange rate for the period is used to convert the Australian dollar amount to
US dollars based on the assumption that these transactions occurred evenly throughout the
period. |
|
(2) |
|
The spot exchange rate on the date of payment is used to convert the Australian dollar amount
to US dollars. |
Actuarial Study; Claims Estimate
The AICF commissioned an updated actuarial study of potential asbestos-related liabilities as of 31
March 2011. Based on KPMG Actuarials assumptions, KPMG Actuarial arrived at a range of possible
total cash flows and proposed a central estimate which is intended to reflect an expected outcome.
We view the
125
central estimate as the basis for recording the asbestos liability in our financial
statements, which under US GAAP, we consider the best estimate. Based on the results of these
studies, it is estimated that the discounted (but inflated) value of the central estimate for
claims against the Former James Hardie Companies was approximately A$1.5 billion (US$1.5 billion).
The undiscounted (but inflated) value of the central estimate of the asbestos-related liabilities
of Amaca and Amaba as determined by KPMG Actuarial was approximately A$2.7 billion (US$2.8
billion). Actual liabilities of those companies for such claims could vary, perhaps materially,
from the central estimate described above. The asbestos liability includes projected future cash
flows as undiscounted and uninflated on the basis that it is inappropriate to discount or inflate
future cash flows when the timing and amounts of such cash flows are not fixed or readily
determinable.
The asbestos liability has been revised to reflect the most recent actuarial estimate prepared by
KPMG Actuarial as of 31 March 2011 and to adjust for payments made to claimants during the year
then ended.
In estimating the potential financial exposure, KPMG Actuarial made assumptions related to the
total number of claims which were reasonably estimated to be asserted through 2074, the typical
cost of settlement (which is sensitive to, among other factors, the industry in which a plaintiff
claims exposure, the alleged disease type and the jurisdiction in which the action is brought), the
legal costs incurred in the litigation of such claims, the rate of receipt of claims, the
settlement strategy in dealing with outstanding claims and the timing of settlements.
Due to inherent uncertainties in the legal and medical environment, the number and timing of future
claim notifications and settlements, the recoverability of claims against insurance contracts, and
estimates of future trends in average claim awards, as well as the extent to which the above named
entities will contribute to the overall settlements, the actual amount of liability could differ
materially from that which is currently projected.
The potential range of costs as estimated by KPMG Actuarial is affected by a number of variables
such as nil settlement rates (where no settlement is payable by the Former James Hardie Companies
because the claim settlement is borne by other asbestos defendants (other than the former James
Hardie subsidiaries) which are held liable), peak year of claims, past history of claims numbers,
average settlement rates, past history of Australian asbestos-related medical injuries, current
number of claims, average defense and plaintiff legal costs, base wage inflation and superimposed
inflation. The potential range of losses disclosed includes both asserted and unasserted claims.
While no assurances can be provided, we believe that we are likely to be able to partially recover
losses from various insurance carriers. As of 31 March 2011, KPMG Actuarials undiscounted central
estimate of asbestos-related liabilities was A$2.7 billion (US$2.8 billion). This undiscounted (but
inflated) central estimate is net of expected insurance recoveries of A$388.1 million (US$401.1
million) after making a general credit risk allowance for insurance carriers for A$58.6 million
(US$60.6 million) and an allowance for A$56.3 million (US$58.2 million) of by claim or
subrogation recoveries from other third parties. We have not netted the insurance receivable
against the asbestos liability on our consolidated balance sheets.
A sensitivity analysis has been performed to determine how the actuarial estimates would change if
certain assumptions (i.e., the rate of inflation and superimposed inflation, the average costs of
claims and legal fees, and the projected numbers of claims) were different from the assumptions
used to determine the central estimates. This analysis shows that the discounted (but inflated)
central estimates could be in a range of A$1.0 billion (US$1.0 billion) to A$2.3 billion (US$2.4
billion). The undiscounted, but inflated, estimates could be in the range of A$1.7 billion (US$1.8
billion) to A$4.6 billion (US$4.8 billion)), as of 31 March 2011. The actual cost of the
liabilities could be outside of that range depending on the results of actual experience relative
to the assumptions made. One of the critical assumptions of the analysis is the
estimated peak year of mesothelioma disease claims which is targeted for 2010/2011. Potential
variation in this estimate has an impact much greater than the other sensitivities. If the peak
year occurs five years later, in 2015/2016, the discounted central estimate could increase by
approximately 50%.
126
Claims Data
The AICF provides compensation payments for Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims
against the Former James Hardie Companies. The claims data in this section are only reflective of
these Australian asbestos-related personal injury claims against the Former James Hardie Companies.
The following table shows the activity related to the numbers of open claims, new claims and closed
claims during each of the past five years and the average settlement per settled claim and case
closed:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended 31 March |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2008 |
|
|
2007 |
|
Number of open
claims at beginning of
period |
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
534 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
Number of new claims |
|
|
494 |
|
|
|
535 |
|
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
463 |
|
Number of closed claims |
|
|
459 |
|
|
|
540 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
519 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
Number of open claims
at end of period |
|
|
564 |
|
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
534 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
|
|
490 |
|
Average settlement
amount per settled
claim |
|
A$ |
204,366 |
|
|
A$ |
190,627 |
|
|
A$ |
190,638 |
|
|
A$ |
147,349 |
|
|
A$ |
166,164 |
|
Average settlement
amount per settled
claim |
|
US$ |
193,090 |
|
|
US$ |
162,250 |
|
|
US$ |
151,300 |
|
|
US$ |
128,096 |
|
|
US$ |
127,163 |
|
Average settlement
amount per case closed |
|
A$ |
173,199 |
|
|
A$ |
171,917 |
|
|
A$ |
168,248 |
|
|
A$ |
126,340 |
|
|
A$ |
128,723 |
|
Average settlement
amount per case closed |
|
US$ |
163,642 |
|
|
US$ |
146,325 |
|
|
US$ |
133,530 |
|
|
US$ |
109,832 |
|
|
US$ |
98,510 |
|
Under the terms of the AFFA, we have obtained rights of access to actuarial information
produced for the AICF by the actuary appointed by the AICF (which we refer to as the Approved
Actuary). Our future disclosures with respect to claims statistics are subject to us obtaining such
information from the Approved Actuary. We have had no general right (and have not obtained any
right under the AFFA) to audit or otherwise require independent verification of such information or
the methodologies to be adopted by the Approved Actuary. As such, we will need to rely on the
accuracy and completeness of the information and analysis of the Approved Actuary when making
future disclosures with respect to claims statistics.
AICF NSW Government Secured Loan Facility
On 9 December 2010, the AICF, Amaca, Amaba and ABN 60 (together, the Obligors) entered into a
secured standby loan facility and related agreements (the Facility) with The State of New South
Wales, Australia (NSW) whereby the AICF may borrow, subject to certain conditions, up to an
aggregate amount of A$320.0 million (US$330.7 million, based on the exchange rate at 31 March
2011).
The amount available to be drawn depends on the value of the insurance policies benefiting the
Obligors and may be adjusted upward or downward, subject to a ceiling of A$320.0 million. At 31
March 2011, the discounted value of insurance policies was A$177.3 million (US$183.2 million, based
on the exchange rate at 31 March 2011).
In accordance with the terms of the Facility, drawings under the Facility may only be used by the
AICF to fund the payment of asbestos claims and certain operating and legal costs of the Obligors.
The amount available to be drawn is subject to periodic review by NSW. The Facility is available to be drawn
up to the tenth anniversary of signing and must be repaid on or by 1 November 2030.
Interest accrues daily on amounts outstanding. Interest is calculated based on a 365-day year and
is payable monthly. The AICF may, at its discretion, elect to capitalise interest payable on
amounts
127
outstanding under the Facility on the date interest becomes due and payable. In addition,
if the AICF does not pay interest on a due date, it is taken to have elected to capitalise the
interest.
NSW will borrow up to 50% of the amount made available under the Facility from the Commonwealth of
Australia (Commonwealth).
To the extent that NSWs source of funding the Facility is from the Commonwealth, the interest rate
on the Facility is calculated by reference to the cost of NSWs borrowings from the Commonwealth
for that purpose, being calculated with reference to the Commonwealth Treasury fixed coupon bond
rate for a period determined as appropriate by the Commonwealth.
In summary, to the extent that NSWs source of funding is not from the Commonwealth, the interest
rate on drawings under the Facility is calculated as (i) during the period to (but excluding) 1 May
2020, a yield percent per annum calculated at the time of the first drawdown of the Facility by
reference to the NSW Treasury Corporations 6% 1/05/2020 Benchmark Bonds, (ii) during the period
after 1 May 2020, a yield percent per annum calculated by reference to NSW Treasury Corporation
bonds on issue at that time and maturing in 2030, or (iii) in any case, if the relevant bonds are
not on issue, a yield percent per annum in respect of such other source of funding for the Facility
determined by the NSW Government in good faith to be used to replace those bonds, including any
guarantee fee payable to the Commonwealth in respect of the bonds (where the bonds are guaranteed
by the Commonwealth) or other source of funding.
Under the Facility, Amaca, Amaba and ABN 60 each guarantee the payment of amounts owed by the AICF
and the AICFs performance of its obligations under the Facility. Each Obligor has granted a
security interest in certain property including cash accounts, proceeds from insurance claims,
payments remitted by the Company to the AICF and contractual rights under certain documents
including the AFFA. Each Obligor may not deal with the secured property until all amounts
outstanding under the Facility are paid, except as permitted under the terms of the security
interest.
Under the terms of the Facility, each Obligor must, upon receipt of proceeds from insurance claims
and payments remitted by the Company under the AFFA, apply all of such proceeds in repayment of
amounts owing under the Facility. NSW may, at its sole discretion, waive or postpone (in such
manner and for such period as it determines) the requirement for the Obligors to apply proceeds of
insurance claims and payments remitted by the Company to repay amounts owed under the Facility to
ensure the AICF has sufficient liquidity to meet its future cash flow needs.
The Obligors are subject to certain operating covenants under the Facility and the terms of the
security interest, including, without limitation, (i) positive covenants relating to providing
corporate reporting documents, providing particular notifications and complying with the terms of
the AFFA, and (ii) negative covenants restricting them from voiding, canceling, settling, or
adversely affecting existing insurance policies, disposing of assets and granting security to
secure any other financial indebtedness, other than in accordance with the terms and conditions of
the Facility.
Upon an event of default, NSW may cancel the commitment and declare all amounts outstanding as
immediately due and payable. The events of default include, without limitation, failure to pay or
repay amounts due in accordance with the Facility, breach of covenants, misrepresentation, cross
default by an obligor and an adverse judgment (other than a personal asbestos or Marlew claim)
against an Obligor.
The term of the Facility expires on 1 November 2030. At that time, all amounts outstanding under
the Facility become due and payable. As of 19 May 2011, all substantive conditions precedent to
drawdown of the facility have been satisfied with only procedural matters remaining. There are no amounts
outstanding under the Facility. Further, from the time of signing through 19 May 2011, there have
not been any drawings on the Facility by the AICF.
128
Any drawings, repayments, or payments of accrued interest under the Facility by the AICF do not
impact the Companys net operating cash flow, as defined in the AFFA, on which annual contributions
remitted by the Company to the AICF are based. James Hardie Industries SE and its wholly-owned
subsidiaries are not a party to, guarantor of, or security provider in respect of the Facility. See
Risk Factors for additional information concerning the AFFA.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Company is involved from time to time in various legal proceedings and administrative actions
incidental or related to the normal conduct of its business, including litigation concerning its
products. Although it is impossible to predict the outcome of any pending legal proceeding, the
Company believes that such proceedings and actions should not, except as it relates to asbestos,
the ASIC proceedings, the matters described in the Product Warranty and Environmental and Legal sections below, the
amended assessment from the ATO and income taxes, individually or in the aggregate, have a material
adverse effect on the Companys consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. See also Risk Factors.
ASIC Proceedings
In February 2007, ASIC commenced civil proceedings in the Supreme Court of New South Wales against
us, ABN 60 and ten then-present or former officers and directors of the James Hardie Group. While
the subject matter of the allegations varied between individual defendants, the allegations against
us were confined to alleged contraventions of provisions of the Australian Corporations Act/Law
relating to continuous disclosure and engaging in misleading or deceptive conduct in respect of a
security. We defended each of the allegations made by ASIC and the orders sought against it in the
proceedings, as did the former directors and officers of the Company.
The proceedings commenced on 29 September 2008 before Justice Gzell. On 23 April 2009,
Justice Gzell issued judgment against the Company and the ten former officers and directors of the
Company.
All defendants other than two lodged appeals against Justice Gzells judgments, and ASIC responded
by lodging cross appeals against the appellants. The appeals lodged by the former directors and
officers were heard in April 2010 and the appeal lodged by us was heard in May 2010.
On 30 September 2010, we entered into agreements with third parties and subsequently received
payment for US$10.3 million relating to the costs of the ASIC proceedings for certain former
officers. These recoveries are reflected as a reduction to selling, general and administrative
expenses for the year ended 31 March 2011. We note that other recoveries may be available resulting
from repayments by third parties, including former directors and officers, in accordance with the
terms of their indemnities.
On 17 December 2010, the New South Wales Court of Appeal dismissed the Companys appeal against Justice Gzells
judgment and ASICs cross appeal and ordered that the Company pay 90% of the costs incurred by ASIC in respect of
the Companys appeal. The Court of Appeal also allowed the appeals brought by the non-executive directors, dismissed
ASICs related cross-appeals, and ordered ASIC to pay the non-executive directors costs of the proceedings and the
appeals. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeals and cross appeals in respect of certain former officers in part and reserved
certain matters for further submissions. On 6 May 2011, the Court of Appeal rendered judgment in the exoneration, penalty and
cost matter for certain former officers in which it varied certain orders made at first instance and ordered that there be no order
as to the costs of the appeals of the certain former officers and ASICs related cross-appeals.
The amount of the costs we may be required to pay to ASIC following the Court of Appeal judgments
is contingent on a number of factors, which include, without limitation, whether such costs
(including the
costs orders in ASICs favour against us in the first instance hearing, which orders were not
disturbed by the Court of Appeal) are reasonable having regard to the issues pursued in the case by
ASIC against us, the associated legal work undertaken specifically in respect of those issues (as
distinct from the legal costs of a previous claim and related order against us that was withdrawn
by ASIC in September 2008 just prior
129
to the commencement of the first instance trial, the legal
costs incurred by ASIC in connection with similar or overlapping claims against other parties in
the first instance or appeal proceedings and the successful interlocutory appeal by the Company
against ASIC during the course of the first instance hearing), the number of legal practitioners
involved in such legal work and their applicable fee rates.
In light of the uncertainty surrounding the amount of such costs, we have not recorded any
provision for these costs at 31 March 2011.
ASIC subsequently filed applications for special leave appeal to the High Court appealing from the Court
of Appeals judgment in favour of the former directors appeals and a former officer. Certain former officers also
filed special leave applications in the High Court. The Company did
not file an application for special leave to the High Court. The High Court granted ASICs applications for
special leave on 13 May 2011. The High Court also granted the special leave applications for one of the
former officers, and the other former officer withdrew his application.
As with the first instance proceedings, we will pay a portion of the costs of bringing and
defending appeals, with the remaining costs being met by third parties, including former directors
and executives, in accordance with the terms of their applicable indemnities.
Losses and expenses arising from the ASIC proceedings could have a material adverse effect on
our financial position, liquidity, results of operations and cash flows.
It is our policy to
expense legal costs as incurred.
For further information, see Section 3, Additional Information for Shareholders Risk Factors and Note 13 to our consolidated financial statements in
Section 2.
Tax Contingencies
Due to our size and the nature of our business, we are subject to ongoing reviews by taxing
jurisdictions on various tax matters, including challenges to various positions we assert on our
income tax returns. We accrue for tax contingencies based upon our best estimate of the taxes
ultimately expected to be paid, which we update over time as more information becomes available.
Such amounts are included in taxes payable or other non-current liabilities, as appropriate. If we
ultimately determine that payment of these amounts is unnecessary, we reverse the liability and
recognise a tax benefit during the period in which we determine that the liability is no longer
necessary. We record additional tax expense in the period in which we determine that the recorded
tax liability is less than the ultimate assessment we expect.
In fiscal years 2011, 2010 and 2009, we recorded an income tax expense of nil, an income tax
expense of US$2.2 million and an income tax benefit of US$3.0 million, respectively, as a result of
the finalisation of certain tax audits (whereby certain matters were settled), the expiration of
the statute of limitations related to certain tax positions and adjustments to income tax balances
based on the filing of amended income tax returns, which give rise to the benefit recorded by us.
We or one of our subsidiaries file income tax returns in various jurisdictions, including the
United States, The Netherlands, Australia, New Zealand, the Philippines and Ireland. We are no
longer subject to US federal examinations by the IRS for tax years prior to tax year 2008. We are
no longer subject to examinations by The Netherlands tax authority, for tax years prior to tax year
2005. We are no longer subject to Australian federal examinations by the ATO for tax years prior to
tax year 2007.
In connection with our re-domicile from The Netherlands to Ireland, we became an Irish tax resident
on 29 June 2010. While we were domiciled in The Netherlands, we derived significant tax benefits
under the US-Netherlands tax treaty. The treaty was amended during fiscal year 2005 and became
effective for us on 1 February 2006. The amended treaty provided, among other things,
requirements that we must meet
for us to qualify for treaty benefits and its effective income tax rate. During fiscal year 2006,
we made changes to our organisational and operational structure to satisfy the requirements of the
amended treaty and believe that we were in compliance and qualified for treaty benefits while we
were domiciled in The Netherlands. However, if during a subsequent tax audit or related process,
the IRS determines that these
130
changes did not meet the requirements, we may not qualify for treaty
benefits and our effective income tax rate could significantly increase beginning in the fiscal
year that such determination is made, and we could be liable for taxes owed for calendar year 2008
and subsequent periods in which we were domiciled in The Netherlands.
We believe that it is more likely than not that we were in compliance and should qualify for treaty
benefits for calendar year 2008 and subsequent periods in which we were domiciled in The
Netherlands. Therefore, we believe that the requirements for recording a liability have not been
met and therefore we have not recorded any liability at 31 March 2011.
Amended Australian Taxation Office Assessment
In March 2006, RCI Pty Ltd (which we refer to as RCI), a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company,
received an amended assessment from the ATO with respect to RCIs income tax return for the year
ended 31 March 1999. The amended assessment related to the amount of net capital gains arising as a
result of an internal corporate restructure carried out in 1998 and was issued pursuant to the
discretion granted to the Commissioner of Taxation under Part IVA of the Income Tax Assessment Act
1936. The amended assessment issued to RCI was for a total of A$412.0 million. However, after
subsequent remissions of GIC by the ATO the total was changed to A$368.0 million, comprising
primary tax after allowable credits, penalties, and GIC.
During fiscal year 2007 RCI agreed with the ATO that in accordance with the ATO Receivable Policy,
RCI would pay 50% of the total amended assessment being A$184.0 million (US$152.5 million), and
provide a guarantee from James Hardie Industries SE (formerly James Hardie Industries N.V.) in
favour of the ATO for the remaining unpaid 50% of the amended assessment, pending outcome of the
appeal of the amended assessment. RCI also agreed to pay GIC accruing on the unpaid balance of the
amended assessment in arrears on a quarterly basis.
The ATO conceded that RCI has a reasonably arguable position that the amount of net capital gains
arising as a result of the corporate restructure carried out in 1998 was reported correctly in the
fiscal year 1999 tax return and that Part IVA does not apply.
On 30 May 2007, the ATO issued a Notice of Decision disallowing RCIs objection to the amended
assessment (which we refer to as the Objection Decision). On 11 July 2007, RCI filed an
application appealing the Objection Decision and the matter was heard before the Federal Court of
Australia in September 2009.
On 1 September 2010, the Federal Court of Australia dismissed RCIs appeal.
Prior to the Federal Courts decision on RCIs appeal, we believed it was more-likely-than-not that
the tax position reported in RCIs tax return for the 1999 fiscal year would be upheld on appeal.
As a result, until 31 August 2010, we treated the payment of 50% of the amended assessment, GIC and
interest accrued on amounts paid to the ATO with respect to the amended assessment as a deposit on
our consolidated balance sheet.
As a result of the Federal Courts decision, we re-assessed its tax position with respect to the
amended assessment and concluded that the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold as
prescribed by US GAAP was no longer met. Accordingly, with effect from 1 September 2010, we removed
the deposit with the ATO from our consolidated balance sheet and recognised an expense of US$345.2
million (A$388.0 million) on our consolidated statement of operations, which did not result in a
cash outflow for the year ended 31
March 2011. In addition, we recognised an uncertain tax position of US$190.4 million (A$184.3
million) on our consolidated balance sheet relating to the unpaid portion of the amended
assessment.
131
RCI strongly disputes the amended assessment and is pursuing an appeal of the Federal Courts
judgment. RCIs appeal was heard from 16 May 2011 to 18 May 2011 before the Full Court of the
Federal Court of Australia. Judgment has been reserved.
With effect from 1 September 2010, the Company has expensed payments of GIC to the ATO as incurred.
The Company will continue to expense GIC as incurred until RCI ultimately prevails on the matter or
the remaining outstanding balance of the amended assessment is paid.
The ATO was awarded costs in connection with RCIs appeal of the objection decision to the Federal
Court of Australia. The Company has made a provision for such costs within other non-current
liabilities on the Companys consolidated balance sheet at 31 March 2011.
For further information, see Risk Factors and Managements Discussion and Analysis Liquidity
and Capital Resources and Note 14 to our consolidated financial statements in Section 2.
ATO Settlement
As announced on 12 December 2008, we and the ATO reached an agreement that finalised tax audits
being conducted by the ATO on our Australian income tax returns for the years ended 31 March 2002
and 31 March 2004 through 31 March 2006 and settled all outstanding issues arising from these tax
audits.
With the exception of the assessment in respect of RCI for the 1999 financial year, the settlement
concluded ATO audit activities for all years prior to the year ended 31 March 2007. The agreed
settlement, made without concessions or admissions of liability by either us or the ATO, required
us to pay an amount of US$101.6 million (A$153.0 million) in December 2008.
Product Warranty
On 30 March 2011, one of the Companys US subsidiaries was named as a defendant in a lawsuit
pending in federal district court relating to product allegedly manufactured by the subsidiary. The
lawsuit seeks unspecified damages on behalf of an individual homeowner.
The individual plaintiff seeks to bring the lawsuit on behalf of a purported but unidentified class
of homeowners. Based on available information and circumstances presently known, the Company
believes that the outcome of the proceedings with respect to the individual plaintiff will not have
a material adverse effect on the Companys financial condition, results of operations or cash
flows. In addition, although the outcome of the individual plaintiffs request for class action
status is uncertain, the Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the lawsuit, and the
subsidiary intends to vigorously defend the action.
Environmental and Legal
The operations of the Company, like those of other companies engaged in similar businesses, are
subject to a number of laws and regulations on air and water quality, waste handling and disposal.
Our policy is to accrue for environmental costs when it is determined that it is probable that an
obligation exists and the amount can be reasonably estimated.
In addition, we are involved from time to time in various legal proceedings and administrative
actions concerning our operations and products, including putative class action lawsuits. With
respect to asserted claims, the Company believes it has made adequate provision on its consolidated
balance sheet as of 31 March 2011 for asserted claims that are reasonably estimable. Although it is
reasonably possible that we could experience an unexpected increase in the cost of asserted claims
and may be subject to new
asserted claims in the future, we are unable to estimate an amount or range of loss in relation to
such matters. Management is of the opinion that based on information presently known, the liability for such
132
matters should not have a material adverse effect on either the Companys consolidated
financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
EMPLOYEES
During each of the last three fiscal years, we employed the following average number of people:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fiscal Years Ended 31 March |
|
|
|
2011 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Fibre Cement United States and Canada |
|
|
1,586 |
|
|
|
1,464 |
|
|
|
1,566 |
|
Fibre Cement Australia |
|
|
416 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
397 |
|
Fibre Cement New Zealand |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
Fibre Cement Philippines |
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
163 |
|
Pipes (United States and Australia) |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
Fibre Cement Europe |
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
Research & Development, including Technology |
|
|
107 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
General Corporate |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Employees |
|
|
2,540 |
|
|
|
2,410 |
|
|
|
2,597 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our Plant City, Florida Hardie Pipe Plant was closed and the business ceased operations in May
2008. As of the end of 31 March 2011, of the 2,540 average number of people employed, approximately
390 employees were members of labour unions (approximately 290 employees in Australia
and 100 employees in New Zealand. Under Australian law, we cannot keep records of union members. The number quoted is the number of people who work
in our factories that have union participation and therefore may be represented by a union). Our management believes that we have a satisfactory relationship
with these unions and its members and there are currently no ongoing labour disputes. We currently
have no employees who are members of a union in the United States.
SHARE OWNERSHIP
As of 31 May 2011, the number of shares of our common stock beneficially owned by each person
listed in Section 2, Remuneration Report.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beneficially |
|
|
Percent of |
|
Name |
|
Owned |
|
|
Class (1) |
|
Current Directors and Executive Officers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Michael Hammes (2) |
|
|
32,847 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Donald McGauchie (3) |
|
|
20,372 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Brian Anderson |
|
|
7,635 |
|
|
|
* |
|
David Harrison |
|
|
12,384 |
|
|
|
* |
|
James Osborne |
|
|
2,551 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Rudy van der Meer |
|
|
17,290 |
|
|
|
* |
|
David Dilger (4) |
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Louis Gries |
|
|
2,562,244 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Russell Chenu |
|
|
406,556 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Robert Cox |
|
|
84,178 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Mark Fisher |
|
|
1,121,505 |
|
|
|
* |
|
Nigel Rigby |
|
|
1,011,604 |
|
|
|
* |
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Indicates that the individual beneficially owns less than 1% of our shares of common stock. |
133
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Based on 437,311,611 shares of common stock outstanding at 31 May 2011 (all of which are
subject to CUFS). |
|
(2) |
|
As of 31 May 2011, 27,847 shares were held in the name of Mr and Mrs Hammes. |
|
(3) |
|
As of 31 May 2011 6,000 shares were held for the McGauchie Superannuation Fund for which Mr
McGauchie is a trustee. |
|
(4) |
|
As of 31 May 2011, 25,000 shares were held for the David Dilger Approved Retirement Fund for
which Mr Dilger is a beneficiary. |
None of the shares held by any of the directors or executive officers has any special voting
rights. Beneficial ownership of shares includes shares issuable upon exercise of options which are
exercisable within 60 days of 31 May 2011.
134
Option Ownership
The number of shares of our common stock that each person listed in Section 2, Remuneration Report
Remuneration Table for Senior Executives, have an option to purchase as of 31 May 2011 was:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Shares Underlying |
|
|
|
|
Name |
|
Options Owned |
|
Exercise Price |
|
Expiration Date |
Current Executive Officers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Gries |
|
|
325,000 |
(1) |
|
A$6.4490/share |
|
December 2012 |
|
|
|
325,000 |
(2) |
|
A$7.05/share |
|
December 2013 |
|
|
|
381,000 |
(3) |
|
A$8.40/share |
|
November 2016 |
|
|
|
415,000 |
(3) |
|
A$8.40/share |
|
November 2016 |
|
|
|
437,000 |
(3) |
|
A$7.83/share |
|
August 2017 |
|
|
|
445,000 |
(3) |
|
A$7.83/share |
|
August 2017 |
Russell Chenu |
|
|
93,000 |
(4) |
|
A$6.30/share |
|
February 2015 |
|
|
|
60,000 |
(3) |
|
A$8.40/share |
|
November 2016 |
|
|
|
65,000 |
(3) |
|
A$8.40/share |
|
November 2016 |
|
|
|
66,000 |
(3) |
|
A$7.83/share |
|
August 2017 |
|
|
|
68,000 |
(3) |
|
A$7.83/share |
|
August 2017 |
Robert Cox |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mark Fisher |
|
|
74,000 |
(1) |
|
A$6.4490/share |
|
December 2012 |
|
|
|
132,000 |
(2) |
|
A$7.05/share |
|
December 2013 |
|
|
|
180,000 |
(6) |
|
A$5.99/share |
|
December 2014 |
|
|
|
190,000 |
(7) |
|
A$8.90/share |
|
December 2015 |
|
|
|
158,500 |
(8) |
|
A$8.40/share |
|
November 2016 |
|
|
|
277,778 |
(9) |
|
A$6.38/share |
|
December 2017 |
Nigel Rigby |
|
|
20,003 |
(5) |
|
A$5.0586/share |
|
December 2011 |
|
|
|
27,000 |
(1) |
|
A$6.449/share |
|
December 2012 |
|
|
|
33,000 |
(2) |
|
A$7.05/share |
|
December 2013 |
|
|
|
180,000 |
(6) |
|
A$5.99/share |
|
December 2014 |
|
|
|
190,000 |
(7) |
|
A$8.90/share |
|
December 2015 |
|
|
|
158,500 |
(8) |
|
A$8.40/share |
|
November 2016 |
|
|
|
277,778 |
(9) |
|
A$6.38/share |
|
December 2017 |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in
December 2005. |
|
(2) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in
December 2006. |
|
(3) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan. Option vesting is subject to performance
hurdles as outlined in the plan rules. |
|
(4) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in February 2008. |
|
(5) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in December 2004. |
|
(6) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in December 2007. |
|
(7) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in December 2008. |
|
(8) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in November 2009. |
135
|
|
|
(9) |
|
Granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. All options vested and became exercisable in December 2010. |
Restricted Stock Unit Ownership
The number of shares of our common stock that each person listed in Section 2, Remuneration Report
Remuneration Table for Senior Executives, held as restricted stock units as of 31 May 2011 was:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Restricted Stock |
|
|
Name |
|
Units Owned |
|
Unvested |
Current Executive Officers |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Louis Gries |
|
|
558,708 |
(1) |
|
|
558,708 |
|
|
|
|
234,900 |
(2) |
|
|
234,900 |
|
|
|
|
81,746 |
(3) |
|
|
81,746 |
|
|
|
|
360,267 |
(5) |
|
|
360,267 |
|
|
|
|
577,255 |
(6) |
|
|
577,255 |
|
Russell Chenu |
|
|
108,637 |
(1) |
|
|
108,637 |
|
|
|
|
45,675 |
(2) |
|
|
45,675 |
|
|
|
|
15,895 |
(3) |
|
|
15,895 |
|
|
|
|
70,052 |
(5) |
|
|
70,052 |
|
|
|
|
72,157 |
(6) |
|
|
72,157 |
|
Robert Cox |
|
|
92,692 |
(1) |
|
|
92,692 |
|
|
|
|
3,286 |
(2) |
|
|
3,286 |
|
Mark Fisher |
|
|
116,948 |
(4) |
|
|
116,948 |
|
|
|
|
39,150 |
(2) |
|
|
39,150 |
|
|
|
|
13,624 |
(3) |
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
|
60,044 |
(5) |
|
|
60,044 |
|
|
|
|
67,003 |
(6) |
|
|
67,003 |
|
Nigel Rigby |
|
|
116,948 |
(4) |
|
|
116,948 |
|
|
|
|
39,150 |
(2) |
|
|
39,150 |
|
|
|
|
13,624 |
(3) |
|
|
13,624 |
|
|
|
|
60,044 |
(5) |
|
|
60,044 |
|
|
|
|
72,157 |
(6) |
|
|
72,157 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan on 15 September 2008. Restricted stock units
vesting is subject to performance hurdles as outlined in the plan rules. |
|
(2) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan on 15 September 2009. Restricted stock units
vesting is subject to performance hurdles as outlined in the plan rules. |
|
(3) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan on 11 December 2009. Restricted stock units
vesting is subject to performance hurdles as outlined in the plan rules. |
|
(4) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan on 17 December 2008. Restricted stock units
vesting is subject to performance hurdles as outlined in the plan rules. |
|
(5) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan on 7 June 2010. Restricted stock units vesting are
subject to performance hurdles as outlined in the plan rules and vest, subject to the
application of the Scorecard, in one instalment on 7 June 2012. |
136
|
|
|
(6) |
|
Granted under the Long Term Incentive Plan on 15 September 2010. Restricted stock units
vesting is subject to performance hurdles as outlined in the plan rules. |
Stock-Based Compensation
At 31 March 2011, we had the following equity award plans: the Executive Share Purchase Plan (which
we refer to as the Plan); the JHI SE 2001
Equity Incentive Plan and the Long-Term Incentive Plan 2006
as amended in 2008 (which we refer to as LTIP). Following completion of the Re-domicile on 17 June
2010, each of these plans (except for the Executive Share Purchase Plan, which is no longer
operational), ceased to be governed by Dutch law and became governed by Irish law. The plans were
also amended to reflect the fact that Irish SE will have a single board of directors, including
changing the names of the plans as appropriate to reflect the single board.
Executive Share Purchase Plan
Prior to July 1998, JHIL issued stock under the Plan. Under the terms of the Plan, eligible
executives purchased JHIL shares at their market price when issued. Executives funded purchases of
JHIL shares with non-recourse, interest-free loans provided by JHIL and collateralised by the
shares. In such cases, the amount of indebtedness is reduced by any amounts payable by JHIL in
respect of such shares, including dividends and capital returns. These loans are generally
repayable within two years after termination of an executives employment. Variable plan accounting
has been applied to the Executive Share Purchase Plan shares granted prior to 1 April 1995 and fair
value accounting has been applied to shares granted after 31 March 1995. The Company recorded no
compensation expense during the years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009. No shares were issued
under this plan during years ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009.
Managing Board Transitional Stock Option Plan
On 22 November 2005, we granted options to purchase 1,320,000 shares of our common stock at an
exercise price per share equal to A$8.53 to the Managing Board directors under the Managing Board
Transitional Stock Option Plan. During fiscal year 2011, the plan and all remaining options issued under the plan lapsed. At 31 March 2011, there
were nil options outstanding under this plan and no further equity awards will be granted under
this plan.
JHI SE 2001 Equity Incentive Plan
Under our 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, our employees, including employees of our subsidiaries and
officers who are employees, but not including any member of our Board, are eligible to receive
awards in the form of nonqualified stock options, performance awards, restricted stock grants,
stock appreciation rights, dividend equivalent rights, phantom stock or other stock-based benefits
such as restricted stock units. The 2001 Equity Incentive Plan is intended to promote our long-term
financial interests by encouraging our management and other persons to acquire an ownership
position in us, to align their interests with those of our shareholders and to encourage and reward
their performance. The 2001 Equity Incentive Plan was approved by our shareholders and Joint Board
subject to implementation of the consummation of our 2001 Reorganisation. The 2001 Equity Incentive
Plan has a 10 year life and will expire in September 2011 if it is not extended. Shareholders will
be asked to extend the life of the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan by a further 10 years at the 2011
AGM.
An aggregate of 45,077,100 shares of common stock have been made available for issuance under the
2001 Equity Incentive Plan, provided that such number (and any awards granted) is subject to
adjustment in the event of a stock split, stock dividend or other changes in our common stock or
capital structure or our restructuring. Our ADSs evidenced by ADRs and our common stock in the form
of CUFS will be equivalent to and interchangeable with our common stock for all purposes of the
2001 Equity Incentive Plan, provided that ADSs will be proportionately adjusted to account for the
ratio of CUFS in relation to ADSs.
137
The following number of options to purchase shares of our common stock issued under this plan were
as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options Outstanding as of |
|
Share Grant Date |
|
Number of Options Granted |
|
|
31 May 2011 |
|
December 2001 |
|
|
4,248,417
|
|
|
|
100,673 |
|
December 2002 |
|
|
4,037,000 |
|
|
|
723,500 |
|
December 2003 |
|
|
6,179,583 |
|
|
|
1,534,250 |
|
December 2004 |
|
|
5,391,100 |
|
|
|
1,321,250 |
|
February 2005 |
|
|
273,000 |
|
|
|
93,000 |
|
December 2005 |
|
|
5,224,100 |
|
|
|
1,882,000 |
|
March 2006 |
|
|
40,200 |
|
|
|
15,000 |
|
November 2006 |
|
|
3,499,490 |
|
|
|
1,481,255 |
|
March 2007 |
|
|
330,900 |
|
|
|
17,100 |
|
December 2007 |
|
|
5,031,310 |
|
|
|
2,250,317 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,418,345 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following number of restricted stock units issued under this plan were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of Restricted |
|
|
Restricted Stock Units |
|
Share Grant Date |
|
Stock Units Granted |
|
|
vested as of 31 May 2011 |
|
June 2008 |
|
|
698,440 |
|
|
|
533,091 |
|
December 2008 |
|
|
992,271 |
|
|
|
408,326 |
|
December 2009 |
|
|
278,569 |
|
|
|
60,988 |
|
December 2010 |
|
|
348,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2,317,706 |
|
|
|
1,002,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Our Remuneration Committee administers the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. Subject to the
provisions of the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, our Remuneration Committee or its delegate is authorised to determine
who may participate in the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, the number and types of awards made to each
participant and the terms, conditions and limitations applicable to each award. In addition, our
Remuneration Committee will have the exclusive power to interpret the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan
and to adopt such rules and regulations as it deems necessary or appropriate for purposes of
administering the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. Subject to certain limitations, our Remuneration
Committee will be authorised to amend, modify or terminate the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan to meet
any changes in legal requirements or for any other purpose permitted by law.
The purchase or exercise price of any award granted under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan may be
paid in cash or other consideration at the discretion of our Remuneration Committee. Our
Remuneration Committee, in its discretion and as allowed by applicable laws, may allow cashless
exercises of awards or may permit us to assist in the exercise of options.
Stock Options. Under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan, our Remuneration Committee or its delegate is authorised to
award nonqualified options to purchase shares of common stock as additional employment
compensation. Options are exercisable over such periods as may be determined by our Remuneration
Committee, but no stock option may be exercised after 10 years from the date of grant. Options may
be exercisable in installments and upon such other terms as determined by our Remuneration
Committee. Options are evidenced by notices of option grants authorised by our Remuneration
Committee. No option is transferable other than by will or by the laws of descent and distribution
or pursuant to certain domestic relations orders.
Performance Awards. Our Remuneration Committee or its delegate, in its discretion, may award performance awards to
an eligible person contingent on the attainment of criteria specified by our Remuneration
Committee. Performance awards are paid in the form of cash, shares of common stock or a combination
of both. Our
138
Remuneration Committee determines the total number of performance shares subject to an award, and
the terms and the time at which the performance shares will be issued.
Restricted Stock Awards. Our Remuneration Committee or its delegate may award restricted shares of common stock,
which are subject to forfeiture under such conditions and for such periods of time as our
Remuneration Committee may determine. Restricted shares may not be sold, transferred, assigned,
pledged or otherwise encumbered so long as such shares remain restricted. Our Remuneration
Committee determines the conditions or restrictions of any restricted stock awards, which may
include requirements of continued employment, individual performance or our financial performance
or other criteria.
Stock Appreciation Rights. Remuneration Committee or its delegate also may award stock appreciation rights either
in tandem with an option or alone. Stock appreciation rights granted in tandem with a stock option
may be granted at the same time as the stock option or at a later time. A stock appreciation right
entitles the participant to receive from us an amount payable in cash, in shares of common stock or
in a combination of cash and common stock, equal to the positive difference between the fair market
value of a share of common stock on the date of exercise and the grant price, or such lesser amount
as our Remuneration Committee may determine.
Dividend Equivalent Rights. Dividend equivalent rights, defined as a right to receive payment with
respect to all or some portion of the cash dividends that are or would be payable with respect to
shares of common stock, may be awarded in tandem with stock options, stock appreciation rights or
other awards under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan. Our Remuneration Committee determines the terms
and conditions of these rights. The rights may be paid in cash, shares of common stock or other
awards.
Restricted Stock Units. Restricted stock units are unfunded and unsecured contractual entitlements
for shares to be issued in the future and may be subject to time vesting or performance hurdles
prior to vesting. On vesting, restricted stock units convert into
shares. We granted 348,426,
278,569 and 1,690,711 restricted stock units under the 2001 Equity Incentive Plan in the years
ended 31 March 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of 31 March 2011, there were 854,409
restricted stock units outstanding under this plan.
Scorecard LTI Units. We granted 450, 35,741 and nil cash settled Scorecard LTI units to employees
in fiscal year 2011, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Compensation expense recognised for awards are
based on the fair market value of JHI SEs common stock on the date of grant and recorded as a
liability. The liability is adjusted for subsequent changes in JHI SEs common stock price at each
balance sheet date. Vesting of cash settled Scorecard LTI units is subject to a service condition.
Other Stock-Based Benefits. Our Remuneration Committee may award other benefits that, by their
terms, might involve the issuance or sale of our common stock or other securities, or involve a
benefit that is measured by the value, appreciation, dividend yield or other features attributable
to a specified number of shares of our common stock or other securities, including but not limited
to stock payments, stock bonuses and stock sales.
Effect of Change in Control. The 2001 Equity Incentive Plan provides for the automatic acceleration
of certain benefits and the termination of the plan under certain circumstances in the event of a
change in control. A change in control will be deemed to have occurred if either (1) any person
or group acquires beneficial ownership equivalent to 30% of our voting securities, (2) individuals
who are members of our Board as of the effective date of the 2001 Equity Incentive
Plan, or individuals who became members of our Board after the effective date of the
2001 Equity Incentive Plan whose election or nomination for election was approved by at least a
majority of such individuals (or, in the case of directors nominated by a person, entity or group
with 20% of our voting securities, by two-thirds of such individuals) cease to constitute being at
least a majority of the members of our Board, or (3) there occurs the consummation of
certain mergers (other than a merger that results in existing voting securities continuing to
represent more than 5% of the voting power of the merged entity or a
139
recapitalisation or reincorporation that does not result in a material change in the beneficial
ownership of the voting securities of the Company), the sale of substantially all of our assets or
our complete liquidation or dissolution.
Long-Term Incentive Plan
At our 2006 AGM, our shareholders approved the establishment of the LTIP to provide incentives to
members of the Managing Board and to certain members of its management or executives. The
shareholders also approved, in accordance with certain LTIP rules, the issue of certain options or
other rights over, or interest in, shares, the issue and/or transfer of shares under them, and the
grant of cash awards to members of our Managing Board and executives. At our 2008 AGM, our
shareholders amended the LTIP to also allow restricted stock units to be granted under the LTIP.
In November 2006 and August 2007, 1,132,000 and 1,016,000 options, respectively, were granted to
Executives under the LTIP. The vesting of these equity awards are subject to performance hurdles
as outlined in the LTIP rules. Unexercised options expire 10 years from the date of issue unless an
Executive ceases employment with the Company.
The Company granted the following restricted stock units to certain members of our management under
the LTIP:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grant Date |
|
Number of Restricted Stock Units Granted |
|
September 2008 |
|
|
1,023,865 |
|
December 2008 |
|
|
545,757 |
|
May 2009 |
|
|
1,066,595 |
|
September 2009 |
|
|
522,000 |
|
December 2009 |
|
|
181,656 |
|
June 2010 |
|
|
807,457 |
|
September 2010 |
|
|
951,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
5,098,524 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of 31 May, 2011, there were 1,937,000 options and 4,257,686 restricted stock units
outstanding under this plan.
Under the terms of the LTIP, 821,459 and 1,089,265 Scorecard LTI units were granted during the
years ended 31 March 2011 and 2010, respectively that provide recipients a cash incentive based on
JHI SEs common stock price on the vesting date. The vesting of awards is measured on individual
performance conditions based on certain performance measures. Compensation expense recognised for
awards are based on the fair market value of JHI SEs common stock on the date of grant and
recorded as a liability. The liability is adjusted for subsequent changes in JHI SEs common stock
price at each balance sheet date.
Effect of Change in Control, Takeover by Certain Organisations or Liquidation. The LTIP provides
for plan participants early exercise of certain benefits or early payout under the plan in the
event of a change in control, takeover by certain organisations or liquidation. For options, a
change in control is deemed to have occurred if pursuant to a takeover bid or otherwise, any
person together with their associates acquire shares, which when aggregated with shares already
acquired by such person and their associates, comprise more than 30% of our issued shares. For
restricted stock units, a change of control is deemed to occur if (1) a takeover bid is made to
acquire all of the shares of the Company and it is recommended by the Board or becomes
unconditional, (2) a transaction is announced which would result in one person owning all the
issued shares in the Company, (3) a person owns or controls sufficient shares to enable them to
influence the composition of the Board, or (4) a similar transaction occurs
which the Board determines to be a control event. On a change of control, the
140
Board can determine that all or some restricted stock units have vested on any
conditions it determines. Any remaining restricted stock units lapse.
Other Compensation
Deferred Bonus Program
After carefully assessing the senior executives response to and performance in the extreme market
conditions facing the entire housing industry in the United States, the Board concluded that
executives performance was of such a standard that in this instance, an exceptional discretionary
bonus was justified, and implemented the Deferred Bonus Program in June 2008.
Payments under this plan comprised of a cash payment equal to one third of the total value
(short-term incentive) and a grant of two year vesting restricted stock units equal to two thirds
of the value (long-term incentive) in June 2008. The total value of cash and restricted stock units
under the Deferred Bonus Program was 75% of the short-term incentive target in fiscal year 2008,
which therefore included an amount equal to 75% of the bonus bank the senior executive had
accumulated for the Companys good performance in fiscal years 2006 and 2007.
The restricted stock units granted in respect of the Deferred Bonus Program vest and
convert into shares on a one-for-one basis in two years if the senior executive has maintained a
satisfactory level of performance during this period, subject to exceptions based on the reasons
for the recipients departure and other specified corporate events.
The Chief Executive Officer was also a participant in this program and received a grant of
restricted stock units in September 2008.
These restricted stock units vested during fiscal year 2011. Accordingly, there are no restricted
stock units outstanding under this program at 31 May 2011.
Executive Incentive Plan and Individual Performance Plan
The Company maintains two variable pay plans:
|
|
|
an Individual Performance Plan (which we refer to as the IP Plan), and |
|
|
|
|
an Executive Incentive Plan (which we refer to as EIP). |
The IP Plan is based on the individuals performance on certain mutually agreed upon personal
objectives.
In fiscal
year 2010, the EIP contained a corporate component which rewarded management based on
performance against predetermined Earnings Before Interest and Taxes (which we refer to as EBIT)
goals which are adopted at the start of each fiscal year. Participating employees will have
different EBIT and individual goals, depending on their function and location. The Board has the
authority and discretion to approve payments under this plan to the Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer, the Remuneration Committee has the authority and discretion to approve or
delegate payments due under this plan to the CEOs direct reports, and the CEO has the authority
and discretion to approve or delegate payments due under this plan to other Company employees for
any given fiscal year.
Fiscal year 2010 bonuses were paid in cash for all employees other than the Chief Executive Officer
or his direct reports, who were granted shares in lieu of cash bonuses. Fiscal year 2011 bonuses
under the EIP and IP plan were paid in cash as per the plan.
141
401(k) Plan
We sponsor a US defined contribution plan, the James Hardie Retirement and Profit Sharing Plan, for
our employees in the United States and a defined benefit pension plan, the James Hardie Australia
Superannuation Plan, for our employees in Australia. The US defined contribution plan is a
tax-qualified retirement and savings plan (which we refer to as the 401(k) Plan) covering all US
employees, subject to certain eligibility requirements. Participating employees may elect to reduce
their current annual compensation by up to US$16,500 in calendar year 2011 and have the amount of
such reduction contributed to the 401(k) Plan, with a maximum eligible compensation limit of
US$245,000. In addition, we match employee contributions dollar for dollar up to a maximum of the
first 6% of an employees eligible compensation.
James Hardie Australia Superannuation Plan
The James Hardie Australia Superannuation Plan is funded based on statutory requirements in
Australia and is based primarily on the contributions and income derived thereon held by the plan
on behalf of the member, and to a lesser degree, on the participants eligible compensation and
years of credited service. Under Australian law, employees do not have to belong to their
employers superannuation fund.
MAJOR SHAREHOLDERS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Major Shareholders
As of 31 May 2011, all issued and outstanding shares of our common stock were listed on the ASX in
the form of CHESS Units of Foreign Securities, or CUFS. CUFS represent beneficial ownership of our
shares. CHESS Depository Nominees Pty Ltd is the registered owner of the shares represented by
CUFS. Each of our CUFS represents one share of our common stock.
To our knowledge, the following table identifies those shareholders who beneficially owned 5% or
more of our shares based on the holdings reported by the shareholder in its last shareholder notice
filed with the ASX and their percentage of shares outstanding based on the number of shares
outstanding as of 31 May 2011 which was 437,311,611 shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares |
|
Percentage of |
|
|
Beneficially |
|
Shares |
Shareholder |
|
Owned |
|
Outstanding |
Commonwealth Bank of Australia (1) |
|
|
49,692,187 |
|
|
|
11.36 |
% |
Schroder Investment Management Australia Limited (2) |
|
|
43,527,584 |
|
|
|
9.95 |
% |
FMR LLC and FIL Limited (3) |
|
|
33,874,177 |
|
|
|
7.75 |
% |
National Australia Bank Limited Group (4) |
|
|
28,198,184 |
|
|
|
6.45 |
% |
Baillie Gifford & Co (5) |
|
|
26,907,513 |
|
|
|
6.15 |
% |
Ausbil Dexia Limited (6) |
|
|
24,980,920 |
|
|
|
5.71 |
% |
Lazard Asset Management Pacific Co (7) |
|
|
24,162,172 |
|
|
|
5.53 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Commonwealth Bank of Australia became a major shareholder on 12 November 2009, with a
holding of 21,820,423 shares of our issued capital and, through subsequent purchases,
increased its holdings of our issued capital to 49,692,187 shares on 18 March 2011 in the last
notice received. |
|
(2) |
|
Schroder Investment Management Australia Limited became a major shareholder on 28 January
2004, with a holding of 25,485,997 shares of our issued share capital and, through subsequent
purchases and sales, Schroder Investment Management Australia Limited increased its holding to
43,527,584 shares on 25 November 2010 in the last notice received. |
142
|
|
|
(3) |
|
FMR LLC and FIL Limited became a major shareholder on 23 July 2009, with a holding of
34,119,335 shares of our issued share capital and through subsequent sales and purchases, FMR
LLC and FIL Limited increased its holding to 33,874,177 shares of our issued share capital on
27 January 2011 in the last notice received. |
|
(4) |
|
National Australia Bank Limited Group became a major shareholder on 25 May 2004, with
23,060,940 shares of our issued share capital and increased its holding to 28,198,184 shares
of our issued share capital on 16 June 2004 in the last notice received. |
|
(5) |
|
Baillie Gifford & Co and its affiliated companies became a major shareholder on 24 December
2007, with a holding of 24,577,253 shares of our issued share capital. On 26 June 2009, their
holdings increased to over 5% of our issued share capital but their substantial holding status
again ceased when their holdings of our issued share capital fell below 5% on 29 June 2009. On
12 November 2009, Baillie Gifford & Co became a major shareholder again and has increased its
holding to 26,907,513 shares of our issued share capital on 24 September 2010 in the last
notice received. |
|
(6) |
|
Ausbil Dexia Limited became a major shareholder on 12 January 2011 with 24,980,920 shares of
our issued capital in the last notice received. |
|
(7) |
|
Lazard Asset Management Pacific Co became a major shareholder on 1 April 2004, with a holding
of 24,505,916 shares of our issued share capital and, through subsequent purchases and sales,
Lazard Asset Management Pacific Co ceased to be a major shareholder on 3 May 2010. On 29 April
2011, Lazard Asset Management Pacific Co became a substantial shareholder again with a holding
of 24,162,172 shares of our issued share capital in the last notice received. |
Concord Capital (which as of August 2010 became part of Invesco Australian Ltd) became a major
shareholder on 18 June 2004, with 24,499,832 shares of our issued share capital. Their substantial
holding status ceased on 6 August 2004 when their holdings in our issued share capital fell below
5%. On 20 August 2004, their holdings increased to over 5% of our issued share capital but their
substantial holding status again ceased when their holding fell below 5% on 8 April 2005. On 26
October 2007, Concord Capital became a substantial shareholder again but their substantial holding
status again ceased when their holding fell below 5% on 3 June 2010. On 18 June 2010, Concord
Capital became a substantial shareholder again but their substantial holding status again ceased
when their holding fell below 5% on 16 December 2010.
Each of the above shareholders has the same voting rights as all other holders of our common stock.
To our knowledge, except for the major shareholders described above, we are not directly or
indirectly owned or controlled by another corporation, by a foreign government or by any other
natural or legal persons severally or jointly.
Other Security Ownership Information
As of 31 May 2011, 0.61% of the outstanding shares of our common stock was held by 78 CUFS holders
with registered addresses in the United States. In addition, as of 31 May 2011, 0.58% of our
outstanding shares was represented by ADSs held by 5 holders, all of whom have registered addresses
in the United States. A total of 1.19% of our outstanding capital stock was registered to 83 US
holders as of 31 May 2011.
Related Party Transactions
Payments Made to Directors and Director Related Entities of JHI SE during the Year
Brian Anderson is a director of Pulte Homes, a home builder in the United States. Pulte Homes does
not buy any James Hardie products directly from the Company, although it does buy a small amount of
James Hardie products through the Companys customers and receives a rebate from James Hardie in
respect of those purchases.
143
Rudy van der Meer was until 1 January 2011 a member of the Supervisory Board of ING Bank Nederland
N.V. and ING Verzekeringen (Insurance) Nederland N.V. Entities in the ING Group provide financial
services to the Company. In each case those entities were providing these services to the Company
prior to Mr van der Meer becoming a Board director.
David Dilger is a director of a number of James Hardies subsidiaries and receives directors fees
for such service approved by the Board of James Hardie Industries SE.
Any transactions mentioned above were conducted on an arms-length basis and in accordance with
normal terms and conditions and were not material to any of the companies listed above or to James
Hardie. Each of these relationships, other than Mr Dilgers service as a director of a number of
James Hardies subsidiaries, existed and was disclosed before the person in question became a Board
director. It is not considered that these directors had any influence over these transactions.
LISTING DETAILS
Price History
The high and low trading prices of JHI SE CUFS on the ASX are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
High (A$) |
|
Low (A$) |
|
Fiscal year ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011 |
|
|
8.05 |
|
|
|
5.05 |
|
|
31 March 2010 |
|
|
8.86 |
|
|
|
3.73 |
|
|
31 March 2009 |
|
|
7.04 |
|
|
|
2.89 |
|
|
31 March 2008 |
|
|
9.65 |
|
|
|
5.34 |
|
|
31 March 2007 |
|
|
10.24 |
|
|
|
6.31 |
|
|
Fiscal quarter ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011 |
|
|
6.88 |
|
|
|
5.67 |
|
|
31 December 2010 |
|
|
7.12 |
|
|
|
5.26 |
|
|
30 September 2010 |
|
|
6.90 |
|
|
|
5.05 |
|
|
30 June 2010 |
|
|
8.05 |
|
|
|
6.11 |
|
|
31 March 2010 |
|
|
8.86 |
|
|
|
7.07 |
|
|
31 December 2009 |
|
|
8.59 |
|
|
|
6.73 |
|
|
30 September 2009 |
|
|
7.95 |
|
|
|
3.73 |
|
|
30 June 2009 |
|
|
5.15 |
|
|
|
3.86 |
|
|
Month ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 May 2011 |
|
|
6.03 |
|
|
|
5.20 |
|
|
30 April 2011 |
|
|
6.37 |
|
|
|
5.72 |
|
|
31 March 2011 |
|
|
6.65 |
|
|
|
5.67 |
|
|
28 February 2011 |
|
|
6.86 |
|
|
|
6.15 |
|
|
31 January 2011 |
|
|
6.88 |
|
|
|
6.15 |
|
|
31 December 2010 |
|
|
7.12 |
|
|
|
5.30 |
|
|
144
The high and low trading prices of JHI SE ADSs on the NYSE are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period |
|
High |
|
|
Low |
|
|
|
(US$) |
|
|
(US$) |
|
Fiscal year ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011 |
|
|
36.96 |
|
|
|
22.01 |
|
31 March 2010 |
|
|
41.22 |
|
|
|
14.50 |
|
31 March 2009 |
|
|
31.55 |
|
|
|
9.38 |
|
31 March 2008 |
|
|
40.50 |
|
|
|
23.00 |
|
31 March 2007 |
|
|
41.70 |
|
|
|
24.20 |
|
Fiscal quarter ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 March 2011 |
|
|
35.55 |
|
|
|
28.63 |
|
31 December 2010 |
|
|
35.50 |
|
|
|
25.10 |
|
30 September 2010 |
|
|
30.40 |
|
|
|
22.01 |
|
30 June 2010 |
|
|
36.96 |
|
|
|
25.84 |
|
31 March 2010 |
|
|
41.22 |
|
|
|
31.90 |
|
31 December 2009 |
|
|
39.91 |
|
|
|
30.67 |
|
30 September 2009 |
|
|
34.50 |
|
|
|
14.50 |
|
30 June 2009 |
|
|
18.99 |
|
|
|
14.95 |
|
Month ended: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31 May 2011 |
|
|
32.14 |
|
|
|
27.57 |
|
30 April 2011 |
|
|
33.34 |
|
|
|
29.83 |
|
31 March 2011 |
|
|
33.03 |
|
|
|
28.63 |
|
28 February 2011 |
|
|
33.93 |
|
|
|
31.38 |
|
31 January 2011 |
|
|
35.55 |
|
|
|
29.97 |
|
31 December 2010 |
|
|
35.50 |
|
|
|
26.32 |
|
Trading Markets
Our securities are listed and quoted on the following stock exchanges:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock (in the form of CUFS)
ADSs
|
|
Australian Securities Exchange
New York Stock Exchange |
We cannot predict the prices at which our shares and ADSs will trade or the volume of trading for
such securities, nor can we assure you that these securities will continue to meet the applicable
listing requirements of these exchanges.
Trading on the Australian Securities Exchange
The ASX is headquartered in Sydney, Australia, with branches located in each Australian state
capital. Our CUFS trade on the ASX under the symbol JHX. The ASX is a publicly listed company
with trading being undertaken by brokers licensed under the Corporations Act. Trading principally
takes place between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. on each weekday (excluding Australian
public holidays). Settlement of trades in uncertificated securities listed on the ASX is generally
effected electronically on the third business day following the trade. This is undertaken through
CHESS, which is the clearing and settlement system operated by the ASX.
Trading on the New York Stock Exchange
In the United States, five JHI SE CUFS equal one JHI SE ADS. Our ADSs trade on the New York Stock
Exchange under the symbol JHX. Trading principally takes place between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and
4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on each weekday (excluding US public holidays). All inquiries and
correspondence regarding ADSs should be directed to The Bank of New York Mellon, depositary for our
ADSs, at 101 Barclay Street, 22W, New York, NY 10286. To speak directly to a Bank of New York
Mellon
145
representative, please call 1-888-BNY-ADRS (1-888-269-2377) if you are calling from within the
United States. If you are calling from outside the US, please call 201-680-6825. You may also send
an e-mail inquiry to
[email protected] or visit the website at
www.bnymellon.com/shareowner.
MEMORANDUM AND ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION
General
We were originally incorporated in 1998 as a private company with limited liability, or B.V. On 24
July 2001, we changed our name to James Hardie Industries N.V. and our legal form into that of a
N.V., a public limited liability company under Dutch law. On 19 February 2010, we changed our name
to James Hardie Industries SE and our legal form into that of a SE, being a Dutch SE company. On 17
June 2010, Stage 2 of the Re-domicile was implemented and we became an Irish SE company
incorporated and existing under the laws of Ireland and we became an Irish tax resident on 29 June
2010.
Our corporate domicile is in Ireland and our office is located at Europa House, Second Floor,
Harcourt Center, Harcourt Street, Dublin 2, Ireland. We are registered at the Companies
Registration Office of the Department of Enterprise Trade and Innovation in Dublin, Ireland under
number 485719.
Key Provisions of our Articles of Association
Purpose of the Company
Our main object, which is stated in our Memorandum of Association, is to:
|
|
carry on the businesses of manufacturer, distributor, wholesaler, retailer, service
provider, investor, designer, trader and any other business (except the issuing of policies of
insurance) which may seem to the SEs board of directors capable of being conveniently carried on
in connection with these objects or calculated directly or indirectly to enhance the value of or
render more profitable any of the SEs property. |
The Memorandum of Association also states that we will have the power to carry on the business of a
holding company and co-ordinate the administration, finances and activities of any subsidiary
companies or associated companies.
We also have the usual powers of an Irish public limited company. These include the power to
borrow, to charge assets, to grant guarantees and indemnities, to incorporate new companies and to
acquire existing companies.
Provisions of our Articles of Association Related to Directors
General and borrowing powers: Our Articles of Association grant the directors a general power to
manage the Company. The directors will have the power to exercise all of the powers of the Company
that have not been otherwise expressly reserved to the shareholders by Irish company law or our
articles of association. In addition, the directors also will be granted certain specific powers by
our articles of association, including:
|
|
|
the power to delegate their powers to the chief executive officer, any director, any
person or persons employed by us or any of our subsidiaries or to a committee of the Board; |
|
|
|
|
the power to appoint attorneys to act on our behalf;
|
146
|
|
|
the power to borrow money on our behalf and to mortgage or charge our undertaking,
property, assets, and uncalled capital as security for such borrowings; and |
|
|
|
|
the power to do anything that is necessary or desirable for us to participate in any
computerised, electronic or other system for the facilitation of the transfer of CUFS or the
operation of our registers that may be owned, operated or sponsored by the ASX. |
Our Articles of Association expressly list some, but not all, of the duties of directors.
Under Irish law, directors have a common law fiduciary duty to act in the best interest of Irish SE
and to exercise good faith and due care and skill. Directors also have statutory duties that mainly
relate to administrative obligations.
Power to vote on compensation: The maximum aggregate remuneration of the non-executive directors is
US$1,500,000 and can be changed from time to time by an ordinary resolution.
Executive directors may be paid such extra remuneration by way of salary, commission or otherwise
as the Board may from time to time determine. Arrangements for remuneration in the form of shares
or CUFS for directors requires shareholder approval pursuant to an ordinary resolution.
There is no requirement for our shareholders to approve the remuneration policy. The Company
currently intends to continue voluntarily producing a remuneration report.
These provisions are subject to the relevant listing rules of the ASX regarding director
remuneration.
Age Limit for Retirement or Non-Retirement: Our Articles of Association do not include any
provisions regarding the mandatory retirement age of a director.
Number of shares for Directors qualification: No director will require a share qualification in
order to act as a director.
Issuance of Shares; Preemptive Rights
We have been registered with one class of shares; however, the articles of association will allow
for any share to be issued with such rights or restrictions as the shareholders may by ordinary
resolution determine.
Shareholders may authorise us (acting through its directors) by special resolution to issue shares
in whatever manner on the basis that they will be subsequently redeemed. Once issued, we may cancel
redeemed shares or alternatively hold them as treasury shares (which subsequently will be reissued
or cancelled).
The Board has the power (a) to issue shares up to a maximum of our authorised share capital and (b)
to limit or exclude statutory pre-emptive rights in respect of such issue for cash consideration,
for a period of up to five years in each case, subject to renewal, by a special resolution of
shareholders (which requires the approval of holders of 75% of shares present in person or by proxy
and voting at the relevant general meeting) in the case of disapplication of statutory pre-emptive
rights, and an ordinary resolution (which requires the approval of holders of a majority of shares
present in person or by proxy and voting at the relevant general meeting) in the case of
authorising the board to issue shares).
Our Articles of Association grant these authorisations to the board, which will expire (unless
renewed) on 2 June 2015.
147
These authorisations are subject to the listing rules of the ASX and NYSE in relation to the issue
of new equity securities, which require:
|
|
|
in the case of the ASX, shareholder approval for the issue of equity securities which
exceed 15% of the number of equity securities on issue (as determined in accordance with the
ASX listing rules and subject to the various exemptions set out therein); and |
|
|
|
|
in the case of the NYSE, shareholder approval for the issuance of shares that have or
will have upon issuance voting power equal to or in excess of 20% of the voting power
outstanding before the issuance of such shares (subject to certain exceptions). |
If the Board is at any time not designated as the authorised body for such powers, the shareholders
acting by ordinary resolution have the power to issue shares, but only upon the proposal of the
Board.
As an Irish company that has listed securities in Australia and the United States, we are subject
to applicable legislation regarding insider trading. Generally, Australian law prohibits persons
from trading on the basis of information which is not generally available and which, if it were
generally available, a reasonable person would expect to have a material effect on the price or
value of securities. Similarly, in the United States, persons are prohibited from trading on the
basis of material, non-public information. We have adopted an internal code on insider trading
consistent with Australian and US laws and regulations.
Repurchase of Shares and Reduction of Capital
Irish law permits us to redeem our shares (provided such shares are redeemable) at any time whether
on or off market without shareholder approval. Accordingly, our Articles of Association provide
that, when we agree to acquire any shares (unless we elect to treat the acquisition as a purchase),
it shall be a term of such contract that the relevant shares become redeemable on the entry into of
that contract and that completion of that contract shall constitute redemption of the relevant
shares. This means that we may acquire our own shares.
In addition, Irish company law permits an Irish company and its subsidiaries to make market
purchases of the shares of the Irish company on a recognised stock exchange if shareholders of the
company have granted the company and/or its subsidiaries a general authority by ordinary resolution
to do so. Currently, the Irish Stock Exchange, the New York Stock Exchange, NASDAQ and the London
Stock Exchange are the recognised stock exchanges for this purpose.
As the ASX is not currently a recognised stock exchange for the purposes of Irish law, on- and
off-market purchases of our shares (by way of trading CUFS) will only be available to us through
their redemption in accordance with the redemption mechanism in our Articles of Association,
outlined above, provided we do not treat such acquisition as a purchase.
A redemption or repurchase of shares may only be funded out of freely distributable reserves or out
of the proceeds of a fresh issue of shares for that purpose.
Under Irish company law, the board may determine whether shares that we have repurchased or
redeemed will either be held in treasury or cancelled. However, under Irish company law, the
nominal value of treasury shares held by us may not, at any one time, exceed 10% of the nominal
value of our issued share capital.
Unless otherwise required by Irish SEs articles of association or Irish law, no business other
than the appointment of a chairman may be transacted at any general meeting unless at least 5% of
Irish SEs issued share capital is present or represented.
148
Shareholders Meetings and Voting Rights
Our annual general meetings will generally be held in Ireland unless shareholder approval, pursuant
to an ordinary resolution, is granted at the preceding annual general meeting to hold the following
general meeting outside of Ireland. There is no requirement that extraordinary general meetings be
held in Ireland. Following our first annual general meeting, we must hold an annual general meeting
in each calendar year and within six months after the financial year end and we shall announce the
date of each such annual general meetings no less than 35 business days before such meeting is due
to be held. All business that is transacted at an annual general meeting shall be deemed to be
special business, except: (1) the declaration of a dividend; (2) the consideration of the accounts,
balance sheets and reports of the directors and auditors; (3) the election of directors in the
place of those retiring (whether by rotation or otherwise); (4) the fixing of the remuneration of
the directors (if required); and (5) the fixing of the remuneration of the auditors.
We shall announce the date of an extraordinary general meeting no less than 35 business days before
such meeting is due to be held save in exceptional circumstances where the board resolves
otherwise. An extraordinary general meeting may be convened by (1) the directors or (2) pursuant to
Irish company law, by one or more persons who alone or together hold 10% of our issued share
capital. An extraordinary general meeting must be convened within 21 calendar days after a request
has been made of us by a shareholder (who holds 10% or more of our issued share capital), and the
extraordinary general meeting must be held no later than two months after such a request has been
made by a shareholder.
One or more persons who alone or together hold at least 10% of our issued share capital may request
that the Board call an extraordinary general meeting. In addition, such holders may also request
that the Board place a matter on the agenda of any general meeting so long as any such request
shall be received by us at least 30 business days before the general meeting to which it relates,
at such postal or e-mail address as specified by us for that purpose in the announcement of the
general meeting. Such request must be accompanied by stated grounds justifying its inclusion, or a
draft resolution, together not to exceed 1,000 words. Such a request will be declined by our Board
where: (i) the request is contrary to the Memorandum or Articles of Association, Irish law or the
ASX Listing Rules, or (ii) the time limits specified in the Articles of Association have not been
complied with.
The quorum for general meetings and for meetings of a separate class of shareholders in Irish SE is
one or more persons who alone or jointly hold at least 5% of Irish SEs issued share capital or, in
the case of a separate class meeting, 5% of the issued share capital of that class. These same
quorum requirements also apply to all adjourned meetings.
Holders of CUFS and ADSs do not appear on our share register as legal holders of shares.
Accordingly, the ability to call an extraordinary general meeting only may be exercised, in the
case of holders of CUFS, by providing instructions to the CUFS depositary or by converting their
CUFS to shares, and, in the case of holders of ADSs, by converting their ADSs to CUFS and
thereafter providing instructions to the CUFS depositary or converting their CUFS to shares.
All shares issued have the right to one vote for each share held on every matter submitted to a
vote of the shareholders. CUFS holders are entitled to attend and to speak at our shareholder
meetings and can vote at our shareholder meetings:
|
|
|
by instructing CHESS Depository Nominees Pty Limited (who we refer to as CDN), as
legal owner of our shares represented by CUFS, how to vote the shares represented by the
holders CUFS; |
|
|
|
|
by directing CDN to appoint itself (or another person) as the Nominated Proxy pursuant
to a voting instruction form provided by the Company; or |
149
|
|
|
by converting the holders CUFS into our shares and voting the shares at the meeting,
which must be undertaken prior to the meeting. However, in order to sell their shares on
the ASX thereafter, it will be first necessary to convert them back to CUFS. |
ADR holders will not be entitled to attend our general meetings of shareholders, but can vote by
giving an instruction to The Bank of New York Mellon, as the ADS depositary on how to instruct CDN
to vote at a meeting.
Irish law and our Articles of Association currently do not impose any limitations on the rights of
persons who are not residents of Ireland to hold or vote shares, solely as a result of such
non-resident status.
Annual Report
Our fiscal year runs from 1 April through 31 March. Irish law requires that our annual accounts
must be laid before the shareholders at the AGM within nine months of the balance sheet date and
that copies of our financial statements must be sent to the shareholders 21 days before the AGM.
Our consolidated annual accounts will be prepared under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles
applicable in the US (which we refer to as US GAAP). We will prepare consolidated annual accounts
under modified US GAAP, which is US GAAP to the extent that it is not inconsistent with Irish
company law. We will also prepare standalone annual entity accounts under Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles applicable in Ireland (which we refer to as Irish GAAP) and lay those
accounts before a general meeting of shareholders.
The annual accounts will also include report of an independent accountant.
Indemnification
Our Articles of Association provide that our current and former directors, company secretary,
employees and persons who may be deemed by our board to be our agent are indemnified by us for
costs, losses and expenses arising out of such persons exercise of their duties to us. However,
under Irish company law, this indemnity only binds us to indemnify a current or former director or
company secretary where judgment is given in any civil or criminal action in favour of such
director or company secretary, or where a court grants relief because the director or company
secretary acted honestly and reasonably and ought fairly to be excused. The articles of association
apply the same restrictions to employees and persons deemed by our board to be our agent who are
not current or former directors or company secretary.
We have also entered into deeds of access, insurance and indemnity with our directors, company
secretary and certain senior employees.
Dividends
Dividends and distributions of assets to shareholders may be declared (a) in the case of dividends,
by the board or (b) upon the recommendation of the board, by an ordinary resolution of
shareholders, provided that with respect to dividends or distributions declared pursuant to
subsection (b) above, the dividends or distributions may not exceed the amount recommended by the
board.
Dividends and distributions may only be made in so far as (a) we have sufficient freely
distributable reserves and (b) our net assets are in excess of the aggregate of called up share
capital plus undistributable reserves and the distribution does not reduce our net assets below
such aggregate.
If directors so resolve, any dividend that has remained unclaimed for twelve years from the date of
its declaration shall be forfeited and cease to remain owing by us. The payment by directors of any
unclaimed dividend or other moneys payable in respect of a share into a separate account shall not
constitute us a trustee in respect thereof.
150
Our board also determines the record dates at which time registered holders of our shares,
including the CHESS Depositary Nominee issuing CUFS to the ADS depositary, will be entitled to
dividends and sets the payment dates. Dividends are declared payable to our shareholders in US
dollars. The ADS Depositary (Bank of New York Mellon) receives dividends in US dollars directly
from JHI SE on each CUFS dividend payment date and will distribute any dividend to holders of ADSs
in US dollars pursuant to the terms of the deposit agreement. Other CUFS holders registered at a
dividend record date are paid their dividend on each CUFS dividend payment date in the equivalent
amount of Australian dollars, as determined by the prevailing exchange rate shortly after the CUFS
dividend record date.
Amendment of Articles of Association
Our Articles of Association may be amended by our shareholders by resolution approved by 75% of the
votes cast at a general meeting of shareholders at which at least 5% of our issued share capital is
present or represented.
Liquidation Rights
In the event of our liquidation, and after we have paid all debts and liquidation expenses, the
excess of any assets shall be distributed among our shareholders in proportion to the capital at
the commencement of the winding up paid up or credited as paid up on such shares held by our
shareholders. As a holding company, our sole material assets will be the capital stock of its
subsidiaries.
Limitations on Right to Hold Common Stock
The Irish Takeover Rules regulate takeover and merger transactions, however effected, by which
control of a target incorporated in Ireland may be obtained or consolidated. Control means a
holding or aggregate holding of shares carrying 30% or more of the voting rights of a company,
irrespective of whether the holding or holdings give de facto control.
The Irish Takeover Rules are statute based. The Irish Takeover Panel is the body that regulates all
transactions subject to the Irish Takeover Rules.
Rule 9 of the Irish Takeover Rules states that, except with the consent of the Irish Takeover
Panel, when:
|
|
|
any person acquires, whether by a series of transactions over
a period of time or not, shares or other securities which (taken together with shares or other securities held or
acquired by persons acting in concert) carry 30% or more of the voting rights of a company;
or |
|
|
|
|
any person, who together with persons acting in concert, holds not less than 30% of the
voting rights and such person or any person acting in concert with them acquires, in any
period of twelve months, additional shares or other securities of more than 0.05% of the
total voting rights of the company, |
such person must extend offers to the holders of any class of equity securities (whether voting or
non-voting) and to holders of any class of transferable voting capital in respect of all such
equity securities and transferable voting capital.
A single holder (that is, a holder excluding any parties acting in concert with the holder) holding
more than 50% of the voting rights of a company is not subject to Rule 9.
The Irish Takeover Rules also contain rules called Substantial Acquisition Rules which restrict
the speed with which a person may increase their holding of shares and rights over shares to an
aggregate of between 15% and 30% of the voting rights of a company. These rules also require
accelerated disclosure of acquisitions of shares or rights over shares relating to such holdings.
151
The Irish Takeover Rules are built on the following general principles that apply to any
transaction regulated by such rules:
|
|
|
all holders of the securities of an offeree of the same class must be afforded
equivalent treatment; moreover, if a person acquires control of a company, the other
holders of securities must be protected; |
|
|
|
|
the holders of the securities of an offeree must have sufficient time and information to
enable them to reach a properly informed decision on the offer; where it advises the
holders of securities, the board of the offeree must give its views on the effects of
implementation of the offer on employment, conditions of employment and the locations of
the offerees places of business; |
|
|
|
|
the board of an offeree must act in the interests of the company as a whole and must not
deny the holders of securities the opportunity to decide on the merits of the offer; |
|
|
|
|
false markets must not be created in the securities of the offeree, of the offeror or of
any other company concerned by the offer in such a way that the rise or fall of the prices
of the securities becomes artificial and the normal functioning of the markets is
distorted; |
|
|
|
|
an offeror must announce an offer only after ensuring that he or she can fulfill in full
any cash consideration, if such is offered, and after taking all reasonable measures to
secure the implementation of any other type of consideration; |
|
|
|
|
an offeree must not be hindered in the conduct of its affairs for longer than is
reasonable by an offer for its securities; and |
|
|
|
|
a substantial acquisition of securities (whether such acquisition is to be effected by
one transaction or a series of transactions) shall take place only at an acceptable speed
and shall be subject to adequate and timely disclosure. |
The prohibition does not apply to holdings by the CUFS depositary, CDN, of our shares as custodian
for the CUFS holders but will apply to CDN where another person acquires or holds a relevant
interest in breach of the provisions. If a person acquires or holds a relevant interest in breach
of the prohibition, we have several powers available to it under our Articles of Association. These
include powers to require the disposal of our common stock, disregard the exercise of votes and
suspend dividend rights. These powers will only extend to that number of shares of common stock
which are acquired or held in breach of the prohibition.
Although these provisions of our Articles of Association may help to ensure that no person may
acquire voting control of us without making an offer to all shareholders, these provisions may also
have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of the Company.
Disclosure of Holdings
Under Irish law, a person must notify us in writing within five business days of an acquisition or
disposition of shares in Irish SE where:
|
|
|
such persons interest was below 5% of our issued share capital prior to such
acquisition and equals or exceeds 5% after such acquisition; |
|
|
|
|
such persons interest was equal to or above 5% of our issued share capital before an
acquisition or disposition and increases or decreases through an integer of a percentage as
a result of such acquisition or disposition (e.g., from 5.8% to 6.3% or from 8.2% to 7.9%);
and
|
152
|
|
|
where such persons interest was equal to or above 5% of our issued share capital before
a disposition and falls below 5% as a result of such disposition. |
In addition, under Irish law, we can, if we have reasonable cause to believe that a person or
company has an interest in our shares, require such person or company to confirm that belief (or as
the case may be) to indicate whether or not it is the case and to provide certain information in
relation to such holdings, including details of his or her interest in our shares and the interests
(if any) of all persons having a beneficial interest in the shares. To the extent any such
information is made available to us, Irish law requires that we make such information available to
any person upon such persons request.
Failure of a shareholder to disclose its interests in our shares as described above will result in
no right or interest of any kind in respect of that persons shares being enforceable, whether
directly or indirectly by action or legal proceeding. If a person fails to respond to us when we
make a request for information in the manner described above, we may apply to the High Court of
Ireland for an order stating that: (a) any transfer of such shares will be void; (b) such shares
will have no voting rights; (c) no further shares will be issued in right of those shares or
pursuant to any offer made to the holder thereof; and (d) such shares will not be entitled to any
payment from us. Such restrictions, whether imposed for a failure to disclose a notifiable interest
or for a failure to respond to a request for information, may only be lifted by an order of the
High Court of Ireland.
Shareholders are also subject to beneficial ownership reporting disclosure requirements under US
securities laws, including the filing of beneficial ownership reports on Schedules 13D and 13G with
the SEC. The SECs rules require all persons who beneficially own more than 5% of a class of
securities registered with the SEC to file either a Schedule 13D or 13G. This filing requirement
applies to all holders of our shares of common stock, ADSs or CUFS because our securities have been
registered with the SEC. The number of shares of common stock underlying ADSs and CUFS is used to
determine whether a person beneficially owns more than 5% of the class of securities. This
beneficial ownership-reporting requirement applies whether or not the holders are US residents. The
decision of whether to file a Schedule 13D or a Schedule 13G will depend primarily on the nature of
the beneficial owner and the circumstances surrounding the persons beneficial ownership. A copy of
the rules and regulations relating to the reporting of beneficial ownership with the SEC, as well
as Schedules 13D and 13G, are available on the SECs website at www.sec.gov.
MATERIAL MODIFICATIONS TO THE RIGHTS OF SECURITY HOLDERS AND USE OF PROCEEDS
In connection with implementation of Stage 2 of our Re-domicile on 17 June 2010, we adopted
articles of association consistent with Irish company law and SE regulations resulting in
substantial changes to the rights of security holders. The information required by this section is
incorporated by reference to Memorandum and Articles of Association Key Provisions of our
Articles of Association.
MATERIAL CONTRACTS
In addition to the other contracts that are described in this annual report, including without
limitation the AFFA and certain other related agreements described in Commitment to Provide
Funding on a Long-Term Basis in Respect of Asbestos-Related Liabilities of Former Subsidiaries,
our stock option plans and certain material employment contracts described under Section 2,
Remuneration Report, and any material contracts that have been entered into in the ordinary
course of business, the following are the contracts we consider to be material to us. All contracts
described below have been filed as exhibits to this annual report and are hereby incorporated by
reference, and the summary below is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full texts of
such contracts.
153
US Dollar Cash Advance Facilities. At 31 March 2011, our credit facilities were drawn to US$59.0
million, which matures in February 2013. For all facilities, interest is calculated two business
days prior to the commencement of each draw-down period based on LIBOR, plus the margins of
individual lenders, and is payable at the end of each draw-down period. At 31 March, 2011, there
was US$59.0 million drawn under the combined facilities and US$261.0 million was available.
As of 31 March 2011, we were in compliance with all restrictive covenants contained in our credit
facility agreements. Under the most restrictive of these covenants, we (i) are required to maintain
certain ratios of indebtedness to equity which do not exceed certain maximums, excluding assets,
liabilities and other balance sheet items of the AICF, Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew Mining Pty
Limited, (ii) must maintain a minimum level of net worth, excluding assets, liabilities and other
balance sheet items of the AICF; for these purposes net worth means the sum of the par value (or
value stated in the books of the James Hardie Group) of the capital stock (but excluding treasury
stock and capital stock subscribed or unissued) of the James Hardie Group, the paid in capital and
retained earnings of the James Hardie Group and the aggregate amount of provisions made by the
James Hardie Group for asbestos related liabilities, in each case, as such amounts would be shown
in the consolidated balance sheet of the James Hardie Group if Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and Marlew
Mining Pty Limited were not accounted for as subsidiaries of the Company, (iii) must meet or exceed
a minimum ratio of earnings before interest and taxes to net interest charges, excluding all
income, expense and other profit and loss statement impacts of the AICF, Amaba, Amaca, ABN 60 and
Marlew Mining Pty Limited and (iv) must ensure that no more than 35% of Free Cash Flow (as defined
in the AFFA) in any given Financial Year is contributed to the AICF on the payment dates under the
Amended Final Funding Agreement in the next following Financial Year. The limit does not apply to
payments of interest to the AICF. Such limits are consistent with the contractual liabilities of
the Performing Subsidiary and the Company under the AFFA.
Gypsum Indemnity. We sold our gypsum wallboard manufacturing facilities in April 2002. Under the
terms of the sale agreement with the buyer, BPB US Holdings, Inc., we agreed to customary
indemnification obligations which generally have expired. However, pursuant to the sale agreement,
we agreed to indemnify the buyer for any future liabilities arising from asbestos-related injuries
to persons or property arising from our former gypsum business. Although we are not aware of any
asbestos-related claims arising from the gypsum business nor circumstances that would give rise to
such claims, our obligation under the sale agreement to indemnify the buyer for liabilities arising
from asbestos-related injuries arises only if such claims exceed US$5 million in the aggregate, is
limited to US$250 million in the aggregate and will continue for 30 years after the closing date of
our gypsum business.
Pursuant to the terms of our agreement to sell our gypsum business, we also retained responsibility
for any losses incurred by the buyer resulting from environmental conditions at the Duwamish River
in the State of Washington so long as notice of a claim is given within 10 years of closing. Our
indemnification obligations in this regard are subject to a US$34.5 million limitation. The Seattle
gypsum facility had previously been included on the Confirmed and Suspected Contaminate Sites
Report released in 1987 due to the presence of metals in the groundwater. Because we believe the
metals found emanated from an offsite source, we do not believe we are liable for, and have not
been requested to conduct, any investigation or remediation relating to the metals in the
groundwater.
EXCHANGE CONTROLS
The European Commission has imposed financial sanctions on a number of countries throughout the
world that are suspected of being involved in activities such as terrorism or repression of its
citizens. Ireland has given effect to these sanctions through the implementation of regulations and
statutory instruments. We do not have any subsidiaries located in countries with imposed financial
sanctions by the European Commission. In addition, we do not conduct business or other
revenue-generating activities in these countries.
Except for restrictions contained in the regulations or statutory instruments referred to above,
there are no legislative or other legal provisions currently in force in Ireland or arising under
our Articles of Association
154
restricting the import or export of capital, including the availability of cash and cash
equivalents for use by JHI SE and its wholly owned subsidiaries, or remittances to our security
holders not resident in Ireland. In addition, except for restrictions contained in the regulations
or statutory instruments referred to above, cash dividends payable in US dollars on our common
stock may be officially transferred from Ireland and converted into any other convertible currency.
There are no limitations, either by Irish law or in our Articles of Association, on the right of
non-residents of Ireland to hold or vote our common stock.
TAXATION
The following summarises the material US, Dutch and Irish tax consequences of an investment in
shares of our common stock. This summary does not address every aspect of taxation relevant to a
particular investor subject to special treatment under any applicable law and is not intended to
apply in all respects to all categories of investors. In addition, except for the matters discussed
under Dutch Taxation, and Irish Taxation, this summary does not consider the effect of other
foreign tax laws or any state, local or other tax laws that may apply to an investment in shares of
our common stock. This summary assumes that we will conduct our business in the manner described in
this annual report. Changes in our organisational structure or the manner in which we conduct our
business may invalidate all or parts of this summary. The laws on which this summary is based could
change, perhaps with retroactive effect, and any law changes could invalidate all or parts of this
summary. We will not update this summary for any law changes after the date of this annual report.
This discussion does not bind either the US, Irish, or Dutch tax authorities or the courts of those
jurisdictions. We have not sought a ruling nor will we seek a ruling of the US, Irish, or Dutch tax
authorities about matters in this summary. We cannot assure you that those tax authorities will
concur with the views in this summary concerning the tax consequences of the purchase, ownership or
disposition of our common stock or that any reviewing judicial body in the United States, The
Netherlands or Ireland would likewise concur.
PROSPECTIVE
INVESTORS SHOULD CONSULT THEIR TAX ADVISERS REGARDING THE PARTICULAR TAX CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACQUIRING, OWNING AND DISPOSING OF SHARES OF OUR COMMON STOCK, INCLUDING THE
EFFECT OF ANY FOREIGN, STATE OR LOCAL TAXES.
United States Taxation
The following is a summary of the material US federal income tax consequences generally applicable
to US Shareholders (as defined below) who invest in shares of our common stock and hold the
shares as capital assets. For purposes of this summary, a US Shareholder means a beneficial owner
of our common stock that is: (1) a citizen or individual resident of the United States (as defined
for US federal income tax purposes); (2) a corporation created or organised in or under the law of
the United States or any of its political subdivisions; (3) an estate whose income is subject to US
federal income taxation regardless of its source or (4) a trust if (i) a court in the United States
can exercise primary supervision over the administration of the trust, and one or more United
States persons can control all of the substantial decisions of the trust, or (ii) the trust was in
existence on 20 August 1996 and properly elected to continue to be treated as a United States
person. If a partnership (including for this purpose any entity treated as a partnership for US
federal tax purposes) is a beneficial owner of a share of our common stock, the US federal tax
treatment of a partner in the partnership generally will depend on the status of the partner and
the activities of the partnership. A holder of our common stock that is a partnership and partners
in that partnership should consult their own tax advisers regarding the US federal income tax
consequences of holding and disposing of those shares.
155
This summary does not comprehensively describe all possible tax issues that could influence a
current or prospective US Shareholders decision to buy or sell shares of our common stock. In
particular, this summary does not discuss: (1) the tax treatment of special classes of US
Shareholders, like financial institutions, life insurance companies, tax exempt organisations,
tax-qualified employer plans and other tax-qualified or qualified accounts, investors liable for
the alternative minimum tax, dealers in securities, shareholders who hold shares of our common
stock as part of a hedge, straddle or other risk reduction arrangement, or shareholders whose
functional currency is not the US dollar; (2) the tax treatment of US Shareholders who own
(directly or indirectly by attribution through certain related parties) 10% or more of our voting
stock; and (3) the application of other US federal taxes, like the US federal estate tax. The
summary is based on the Internal Revenue Code, applicable US Department of Treasury regulations,
judicial decisions and administrative rulings and practice, all as of the date of this annual
report.
Treatment of ADSs. For US federal income tax purposes, a holder of an ADS is considered the owner
of the shares of stock represented by the ADS. Accordingly, except as otherwise noted, references
in this summary to ownership of shares of our common stock includes ownership of the shares of our
common stock underlying the corresponding ADSs.
Taxation of Distributions. Subject to the passive foreign investment company rules discussed below,
the tax treatment of a distribution on shares of our common stock held by a US Shareholder depends
on whether the distribution is from our current or accumulated earnings and profits (as determined
under US federal income tax principles). To the extent a distribution is from our current or
accumulated earnings and profits, a US Shareholder will include the amount of the distribution in
gross income as a dividend. To the extent a distribution exceeds our current and accumulated
earnings and profits, a US Shareholder will treat the excess first as a non-taxable return of
capital to the extent of the US Shareholders tax basis in those shares and thereafter as capital
gain. See the discussion of Capital Gain Rates below. Notwithstanding the foregoing described
treatment, we do not intend to maintain calculations of our current and accumulated earnings and
profits. Dividends received on shares of our common stock will not qualify for the inter-corporate
dividends received deduction.
Distributions to US Shareholders that are treated as dividends may be subject to a reduced rate of
tax under US tax laws. For taxable years beginning after 31 December 2002, qualified dividend
income is subject to a maximum tax rate of 15%. Qualified dividend income includes dividends
received from a qualified foreign corporation. A qualified foreign corporation includes (1) a
foreign corporation that is eligible for the benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the
United States that contains an exchange of information program and (2) a foreign corporation that
pays dividends with respect to shares of its stock that are readily tradable on an established
securities market in the United States. We believe that we are, and will continue to be, a
qualified foreign corporation and that dividends we pay with respect to our shares will qualify
as qualified dividend income. To be eligible for the 15% tax rate, a US Shareholder must hold our
shares un-hedged for a minimum holding period (generally, 61 days during the 121-day period
beginning on the date that is 60 days before the ex-dividend date of the distribution). Although we
believe we presently are, and will continue to be, a qualified foreign corporation, we cannot
guarantee that we will so qualify. For example, we will not constitute a qualified foreign
corporation if we are classified as a passive foreign investment company (discussed below) in
either the taxable year of the distribution or the preceding taxable year.
Distributions to US Shareholders that are treated as dividends are generally considered income from
sources outside the United States and, for purposes of computing the limitations on foreign tax
credits that apply separately to specific categories of income, foreign source passive category
income or, in the case of certain holders, general category income. However, if United States
persons own, directly or indirectly, 50% or more of our shares of common stock, then a portion of
the dividends (based on the portion of our earnings and profits that is from US sources) may be
treated as sourced within the United States. This 50% ownership rule could potentially limit a US
Shareholders ability to use foreign tax credits against the shareholders US tax liability. In
addition, special rules will apply to determine a US Shareholders foreign
156
tax credit limitation if a dividend distributed with respect to our shares constitutes qualified
dividend income (as described above). See the discussion of Credit of Foreign Taxes Withheld
below.
The amount of any distribution we make on shares of our common stock in foreign currency generally
will equal the fair market value in US dollars of that foreign currency on the date a US
Shareholder receives it. A US Shareholder will have a tax basis in the foreign currency equal to
its US dollar value on the date of receipt and will recognise ordinary US source gain or loss when
it sells or exchanges the foreign currency. US Shareholders who are individuals will not recognise
gain upon selling or exchanging foreign currency if the gain does not exceed US$200 in a taxable
year and the sale or exchange constitutes a personal transaction under the Code. The amount of
any distribution we make with respect to shares of our common stock in property other than money
will equal the fair market value of that property on the date of distribution.
Credit of Foreign Taxes Withheld. Under certain conditions, including a requirement to hold shares
of our common stock un-hedged for a certain period, and subject to limitations, a US Shareholder
may claim a credit against the US Shareholders federal income tax liability for the foreign tax
owed and withheld or paid with respect to distributions on our shares. Alternatively, a US
Shareholder may deduct the amount of withheld foreign taxes, but only for a year for which the US
Shareholder elects to deduct all foreign income taxes. Complex rules determine how and when the
foreign tax credit applies, and US Shareholders should consult their tax advisers to determine
whether and to what extent they may claim foreign tax credits.
Sale or Other Disposition of Shares. Subject to the passive foreign investment company rules
discussed below, a US Shareholder will recognise capital gain or loss on the sale or other taxable
disposition of shares of our common stock, equal to the difference between the US Shareholders
adjusted tax basis in the shares sold or disposed of and the amount realised on the sale or
disposition. Individual US Shareholders may benefit from lower marginal tax rates on capital gains
recognised on shares sold, depending on the US Shareholders holding period for the shares. See the
discussion of Capital Gain Rates below. Capital losses that do not offset capital gains are
subject to limitations on deductibility. The gain or loss from the sale or other disposition of
shares of our common stock generally will be treated as income from sources within the United
States for foreign tax credit purposes, unless the US Shareholder is a US citizen residing outside
the United States and certain other conditions are met.
Capital Gain Rates. For individual US Shareholders, the tax rates applicable to capital gain and
ordinary income may vary substantially. For calendar year 2010, the highest marginal income tax
rate that could apply to the ordinary income of an individual US Shareholder (disregarding the
effect of limitations on deductions) was 35%. In contrast, a maximum rate of 15% applied to any net
capital gain of an individual US Shareholder if that gain was attributable to the sale or exchange
of capital assets held more than one year. Gain attributable to the sale or exchange of capital
assets held one year or less is short-term capital gain, taxable at the same rates as ordinary
income. In addition, a maximum rate of 15% applies to qualified dividend income (as described
above).
Passive Foreign Investment Company Status. Special US federal income tax rules apply to US
Shareholders owning capital stock of a PFIC. A foreign corporation will be a PFIC for any taxable
year in which 75% or more of its gross income is passive income or in which 50% or more of the
average value of its assets is passive assets (generally assets that generate passive income or
assets held for the production of passive income). For these purposes, passive income excludes
certain interest, dividends or royalties from related parties.
If we were a PFIC, each US Shareholder would likely face increased tax liabilities upon the sale or
other disposition of shares of our common stock or upon receipt of excess distributions, unless
the US Shareholder elects (1) to be taxed currently on its pro rata portion of our income,
regardless of whether the income was distributed in the form of dividends or otherwise (provided we
furnish certain information to our shareholders), or (2) to mark its shares to market by accounting
for any difference between the shares fair market value and adjusted basis at the end of the
taxable year by either an inclusion in income or a deduction from income (provided our ADSs, CUFS
or common shares satisfy a test for being regularly
157
traded on a qualified exchange or other market). Because of the manner in which we operate our
business, we are not, nor do we expect to become, a PFIC.
Controlled Foreign Corporation Status. If more than 50% of either the voting power of all classes
of our voting stock or the total value of our stock is owned, directly or indirectly, by citizens
or residents of the United States, United States domestic partnerships and corporations or estates
or trusts other than foreign estates or trusts, each of which owns 10% or more of the total
combined voting power of all classes of our stock entitled to vote, which we refer to as 10-Percent
Shareholders, we could be treated as a CFC, under the Code. This classification would, among other
consequences, require 10-Percent Shareholders to include in their gross income their pro rata
shares of our Subpart F income (as specifically defined by the Code) and our earnings invested in
US property (as specifically defined by the Code).
In addition, gain from the sale or exchange of our common shares by a United States person who is
or was a 10-Percent Shareholder at any time during the five-year period ending with the sale or
exchange is treated as dividend income to the extent of the earnings and profits attributable to
the stock sold or exchanged. Under certain circumstances, a corporate shareholder that directly
owns 10% or more of our voting shares may be entitled to an indirect foreign tax credit for income
taxes we paid in connection with amounts so characterised as dividends under the Code.
If we were classified as both a PFIC and a CFC, generally we would not be treated as a PFIC with
respect to 10-Percent Shareholders. We believe that we are not and will not become a CFC.
US Federal Income Tax Provisions Applicable to Non-United States Holders. A Non-US Holder means a
beneficial owner of our common stock that is (1) a nonresident alien as to the United States for US
federal income tax purposes; (2) a corporation created or organised in or under the law of a
country, or any of its political subdivisions, other than the United States; or (3) an estate or
trust that is not a US Shareholder. A Non-US Shareholder generally will not be subject to US
federal income taxes, including US withholding taxes, on any dividends paid on our shares or on any
gain realised on a sale, exchange or other disposition of the shares unless the dividends or gain
is effectively connected with the conduct by the Non-US Shareholder of trade or business in the
United States (and is attributable to a permanent establishment or fixed base the Non-US
Shareholder maintains in the United States if an applicable income tax treaty so requires as a
condition for the Non-US Shareholder to be subject to US taxation on a net income basis on income
related to the common stock). A corporate Non-US Shareholder under certain circumstances may also
be subject to an additional branch profits tax on that type of income, the rate of which may be
reduced pursuant to an applicable income tax treaty. In addition, gain recognised on a sale,
exchange or other disposition of our shares by a Non-US Shareholder who is an individual generally
will be subject to US federal income taxes if the Non-US Shareholder is present in the United
States for 183 days or more in the taxable year in which the sale, exchange or other disposition
occurs and certain other conditions are met.
US Information Reporting and Backup Withholding. Dividend payments on shares of our common stock
and proceeds from the sale, exchange or redemption of shares of our common stock may be subject to
information reporting to the Internal Revenue Service and possible US backup withholding at a
current rate of 28%. Backup withholding will not apply to a shareholder who furnishes a correct
taxpayer identification number or certificate of foreign status and makes any other required
certification or who is otherwise exempt from backup withholding. United States persons who are
required to establish their exempt status generally must provide that certification on a properly
completed Internal Revenue Service Form W-9 (Request for Taxpayer Identification Number and
Certification). Non-US Shareholders generally will not be subject to US information reporting or
backup withholding. However, Non-US Shareholders may be required to provide certification of non-US
status in connection with payments received in the United States or through certain US related
financial intermediaries.
Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Amounts withheld as backup withholding may be credited
against a shareholders US federal income tax liability, and a shareholder may obtain a refund of
any
158
excess amounts withheld under the backup withholding rules by filing the appropriate claim for
refund with the Internal Revenue Service and furnishing any required information.
Dutch Taxation
As from 1 April 2010 through 28 June 2010 we believe we should be considered to be a Dutch tax
resident. However, with effect from 29 June 2010 forward, we believe we should be considered to be
an Irish tax resident, as explained below under the Irish Taxation section, and should no longer be
considered to be a Dutch tax resident under the Netherlands/Ireland double tax treaty from the date
that the Irish tax authorities treat us as an Irish resident company under the treaty. In this
regard, for the period covering 1 April 2010 through 28 June 2010, the following summary of the
material Dutch tax consequences is generally applicable to an investment in shares of our common
stock by a beneficial owner who is neither a tax resident nor a deemed tax resident of The
Netherlands. This summary does not comprehensively describe all possible tax issues that could
influence a prospective shareholders decision to acquire shares of our common stock. For example,
this summary omits from discussion Netherlands gift, estate and inheritance taxes. The summary is
based on the Dutch tax legislation, published case law and other applicable regulations as at the
date of this annual report, any of which may change possibly with retroactive effect.
Treatment of ADSs. In general, for Dutch tax purposes, an owner of depositary receipts is
considered the owner of the shares of stock represented by depositary receipts. Accordingly, except
as otherwise noted, references in this section of the annual report to ownership of shares of our
common stock includes ownership of the shares underlying the corresponding ADSs.
Dutch Dividend Withholding Tax. As from 1 January 2007, The Netherlands has unilaterally reduced
its dividend withholding tax rate to 15% irrespective of whether the recipient is entitled to the
benefits of a tax treaty concluded with The Netherlands. The term dividends for this purpose
includes, but is not limited to:
|
(1) |
|
direct or indirect distributions in cash or in kind, deemed or constructive
distributions, and repayments of additional paid-in capital not recognised as such for
The Netherlands dividend withholding tax purposes; |
|
|
(2) |
|
liquidation proceeds, proceeds of redemption of shares of common stock or,
generally, except if a certain specific exemption applies, consideration paid by us for
the repurchase of shares of common stock in excess of the average paid-in capital
recognised for The Netherlands dividend withholding tax purposes; |
|
|
(3) |
|
the par value of shares of common stock issued to a holder of shares of common
stock or an increase of the par value of shares of common stock, as the case may be, to
the extent that no contribution to capital, recognised for The Netherlands dividend
withholding tax purposes, was made or will be made; and |
|
|
(4) |
|
the partial repayment of paid-in capital, recognised for Netherlands dividend
withholding tax purposes, if and to the extent that there are net profits, or zuivere
winst, for dividend withholding tax purposes, unless the general meeting of our
shareholders has previously resolved to make such repayment and provided that the par
value of the shares of common stock concerned has been reduced by a corresponding
amount by changing our Articles of Association. As a result of contributions in kind
(i.e., in shares) to our paid-in capital made prior to the listing of
our common shares, a portion of such paid-in capital may not be recognised for Dutch dividend
withholding tax purposes. |
If a double taxation convention is in effect between The Netherlands and the country of residence
of a non-resident shareholder and depending on the terms of that double taxation convention, such
non-resident
159
shareholder may be eligible for a full or partial exemption resulting in a lower dividend
withholding tax rate than 15%.
For example, under the US-NL Treaty, certain US corporate shareholders owning directly at least 10%
of our voting power are eligible for a reduction to 5% with respect to dividends that we pay,
unless the shares of common stock held by such residents form part of the business property of a
business carried on through a permanent establishment in The Netherlands. The same exception
applies if the beneficial owner of the shares, being a citizen or resident of the United States,
performs independent personal services from a fixed base situated in The Netherlands and the
holding of the shares of common stock in respect of which the dividends are paid pertains to such
fixed base in The Netherlands. The US-NL Treaty fully exempts from tax dividends we pay to exempt
pension organisations and exempt organisations, as defined under the treaty. A shareholder of our
common stock, other than an individual, will be ineligible for the benefits of the US-NL Treaty
unless the shareholder satisfies certain tests under the limitation on benefits provisions of
Article 26 of the US-NL Treaty. To prevent so-called dividend stripping, The Netherlands law
generally denies the treaty benefit of a reduced dividend withholding tax rate for any dividend
paid to a recipient who is not the beneficial owner of the dividend.
A qualified exempt pension organisation may obtain a full exemption from the dividend withholding
tax if, before the payment of the dividend, the organisation gives us in duplicate a signed Form IB
96 USA, along with the requisite bankers affidavit as described above, and includes IRS Form 6166
for the relevant year or a valid qualification certification issued by the competent Dutch tax
office and complies with certain other requirements. Other qualifying exempt organisations are
ineligible for relief from withholding at source but may claim a refund of the tax withheld by
filing a Form IB 95 USA and complying with certain other formalities.
Holders of shares of our common stock through a depository will initially receive dividends subject
to a withholding tax rate of 15%. Upon timely receipt of required documents concerning a holders
eligibility for the reduced rate under the US-NL Treaty, dependent on the status of the holder, the
dividend-disbursing agent (via any nominee) will pay an amount equal to 10% of the dividend to the
holder.
Dutch Taxes on Income and Capital Gains. A shareholder of shares of our common stock will not be
subject to any Dutch taxes in respect of dividends distributed by us or capital gains realised on
the disposition of shares of our common stock (other than the dividend withholding tax described
above), provided that:
|
(1) |
|
such shareholder is neither tax resident nor deemed to be tax resident in The
Netherlands, nor has elected to be subject to the rules of the Dutch Income Tax Act
2001 that apply to residents of The Netherlands; |
|
|
(2) |
|
such shareholder does not have a business or an interest in a business that is,
in whole or in part, carried on through a permanent establishment or a permanent
representative in The Netherlands and to which business or part of a business, as the
case may be, the shares of common stock are attributable; |
|
|
(3) |
|
such shareholder does not perform independent personal services in The
Netherlands giving rise to a fixed base in The Netherlands to which the shares of
common stock are attributable; and |
|
|
(4) |
|
the shares of common stock owned by such shareholder do not form part of a
substantial interest or a deemed substantial interest, as defined below, in our share
capital or, if such shares of common stock do form part of such an interest, they form
part of the assets of a business other than a Dutch business. |
160
Generally, a shareholder of our common stock will have a substantial interest in our shares only if
the shareholder, the spouse of the shareholder, certain other relatives (including foster
children), or certain persons in the household of the shareholder, alone or together, whether
directly or indirectly, own or possess certain rights (e.g., the right of usufruct) in, shares of
our stock representing 5% or more of the total issued and outstanding capital (or the issued and
outstanding capital of any class of shares), or rights to acquire the shares, whether or not
already issued, that represent at any time 5% or more of the total issued and outstanding capital
(or the issued and outstanding capital of any class of shares) or the ownership of certain profit
participating certificates that relate to 5% or more of the annual profit and/or to 5% or more of
the liquidation proceeds. Shareholders of our common stock who do not hold a substantial interest
themselves will also be subject to the substantial interest regime if their spouse and/or certain
other relatives hold a substantial interest. A deemed substantial interest is present if a
substantial interest or part of a substantial interest has been disposed of, or is deemed to have
been disposed of, without recognition of a gain.
If a shareholder has a substantial interest in the shares of our common stock and is resident of a
country with which The Netherlands has concluded a convention to avoid double taxation, such
shareholder may, depending on the terms of such double taxation convention, be eligible for an
exemption from Dutch tax on capital gains realised upon the disposition or deemed disposition of
shares of our common stock, or to a full or partial exemption from Netherlands income tax on
dividends we pay.
Under the US-NL Treaty, capital gains realised by a shareholder that has a substantial interest in
the shares of our common stock and is a resident of the United States (as defined in the US-NL
Treaty) upon the disposition of shares of our common stock, are, with certain exceptions, generally
exempt from Dutch tax.
As indicated above, a shareholder of shares of our common stock, other than an individual, will be
ineligible for the benefits of the US-NL Treaty if such shareholder does not satisfy the limitation
on benefits provisions under Article 26 of the US-NL Treaty.
Other Taxes and Duties. No other Dutch registration tax, transfer tax, stamp duty or any similar
documentary tax or duty will be payable by our investors in respect of or in connection with the
subscription, issue, placement, allotment or transfer of shares of our common stock.
Irish Taxation
As discussed above, with effect from 29 June 2010 forward, we believe we should be considered to be
an Irish tax resident and should no longer be considered to be a Dutch tax resident under the
Netherlands/Ireland double tax treaty from the date that the Irish tax authorities treat us as an
Irish resident company under the treaty. Accordingly, we believe that the Irish tax implications
set out below are relevant for shareholders who invest in shares of our common stock and hold the
shares as capital assets.
The following is a summary of the material Irish tax consequences generally applicable to
shareholders who invest in shares of our common stock, who are neither tax resident, nor ordinarily
resident in, Ireland. This summary does not contain a detailed description of all of the Irish tax
consequences for all shareholders, which depend on that shareholders particular circumstances, and
should not be a substitute for advice from an appropriate professional adviser in relation to all
of the possible tax issues that could influence a prospective shareholders decision to acquire
shares of our common stock. This summary is based on Irish tax legislation, relevant Irish case
law, other Irish Revenue guidance and published opinions and administrative pronouncements of the
Irish tax authorities, income tax treaties to which Ireland is a party, and such other authorities
as we have considered relevant, all as in effect and available as at the date of this annual
report, any of which may change possibly with retroactive effect.
Treatment of ADSs. In general, for Irish tax purposes, an owner of depositary receipts is
considered the owner of the shares of stock represented by depositary receipts. Accordingly, except
as otherwise noted,
161
references in this section of the annual report to ownership of shares of our common stock includes
ownership of the shares underlying the corresponding ADSs.
Irish Dividend Withholding Tax. Distributions made by us to non-Irish resident shareholders will,
subject to certain exceptions, be subject to Irish dividend withholding tax at the standard rate of
income tax (which is currently 20%) unless you are a shareholder who falls within one of the
categories of exempt shareholders referred to below. Where dividend withholding tax applies, we
will be responsible for withholding the dividend withholding tax at source. For dividend
withholding tax purposes, a dividend includes any distribution made by us to our shareholders,
including cash dividends, non-cash dividends and additional shares taken in lieu of a cash
dividend.
Dividend withholding tax is not payable where an exemption applies provided that we have received
all necessary documentation required by the relevant legislation from our shareholders prior to
payment of the dividend.
Certain of our non-Irish tax resident shareholders (both individual and corporate) are entitled to
an exemption from dividend withholding tax. In particular, a non-Irish tax resident shareholder is
not subject to dividend withholding tax on dividends received from us where the shareholder is:
|
|
an individual shareholder resident for tax purposes in either a member state of the EU
(apart from Ireland) or in a country with which Ireland has a double tax treaty, and the
individual is neither resident nor ordinarily resident in Ireland; |
|
|
|
a corporate shareholder not resident for tax purposes in Ireland nor ultimately controlled,
directly or indirectly, by persons so resident and which is resident for tax purposes in
either a member state of the EU (apart from Ireland) or a country with which Ireland has a
double tax treaty; |
|
|
|
a corporate shareholder that is not resident for tax purposes in Ireland and which is
ultimately controlled, directly or indirectly, by persons resident in either a member state of
the EU (apart from Ireland) or in a country with which Ireland has a double tax treaty; |
|
|
|
a corporate shareholder that is not resident for tax purposes in Ireland and whose
principal class of shares (or those of its 75% parent) is substantially and regularly traded
on a recognised stock exchange in either a member state of the EU (including Ireland where the
company trades only on the Irish stock exchange) or in a country with which Ireland has a
double tax treaty or on an exchange approved by the Irish Minister for Finance; or |
|
|
|
a corporate shareholder that is not resident for tax purposes in Ireland and is
wholly-owned, directly or indirectly, by two or more companies the principal class of shares
of each of which is substantially and regularly traded on a recognised stock exchange in
either a member state of the EU (including Ireland where the company trades only on the Irish
stock exchange) or in a country with which Ireland has a double tax treaty or on an exchange
approved by the Irish Minister for Finance, |
and provided that, in all cases noted above, the shareholder has made the appropriate non-resident
declaration to us prior to payment of the dividend.
Where our shareholders hold ADSs, they may not be required to submit an appropriate declaration in
order to receive dividends without deduction of Irish dividend withholding tax provided their
registered address is in the US.
Non-resident shareholders who are entitled to an exemption, as outlined above, and held their
shares on 23 June 2009, will generally be able to receive dividends without any dividend
withholding tax (and without the need to complete the aforementioned non-resident declaration
forms) for a period of one year from 29 June 2010. Shareholders who acquired their shares after 23
June 2009 will not be entitled to this one year grace period and will be subject to the
non-resident declaration procedures described below.
162
After this one year period, shareholders must complete and send to us a non-resident declaration
form in order to avoid Irish dividend withholding tax. If the appropriate declaration is not made,
these shareholders will be liable for Irish dividend withholding tax of 20% on dividends paid by us
and may not be entitled to offset this tax. In this case, it would be necessary for shareholders
to apply for a refund of the withholding tax directly from the Irish Revenue authorities.
Shareholders that do not fulfil the documentation requirements or otherwise do not qualify for one
of the withholding tax exemptions outlined above may be able to claim treaty benefits under a
double taxation convention. In this regard, where a double taxation convention is in effect
between Ireland and the country of residence of a non-resident shareholder, depending on the terms
of that double taxation convention, such a non-resident shareholder may be eligible for a full or
partial exemption resulting in a lower dividend withholding tax rate than 20%.
For example, under the US-Ireland Treaty, certain US corporate shareholders owning directly at
least 10% of our voting power, are eligible for a reduction in withholding tax to 5% with respect
to dividends that we pay, unless the shares of common stock held by such residents form part of the
business property of a business carried on through a permanent establishment in Ireland. The same
exception applies if the beneficial owner of the shares, being a citizen or resident of the United
States, performs independent personal services from a fixed base situated in Ireland and the
holding of the shares of common stock in respect of which the dividends are paid pertains to such
fixed base in Ireland. A shareholder of our common stock, other than an individual, will be
ineligible for the benefits of the US-Irish Treaty unless the shareholder satisfies certain tests
under the LOB provisions of Article 23 of the US-Ireland Treaty. To prevent so-called dividend
stripping, Irish law generally denies the treaty benefit of a reduced dividend withholding tax rate
for any dividend paid to a recipient who is not the beneficial owner of the dividend.
Irish Taxes on Income and Capital Gains. Shareholders who are neither tax resident of, nor
ordinarily resident in, Ireland should not be subject to any Irish taxes in respect of dividends
distributed by us (other than the dividend withholding tax described above) or capital gains
realised on the disposition of shares of our common stock unless such shares are used, held or
acquired for the purposes of a trade, profession or vocation carried on in Ireland through a branch
or an agency. An individual who is temporarily a non-resident of Ireland at the time of the
disposal may, under anti-avoidance legislation, still be liable to Irish taxation on any chargeable
gains realised (subject to the availability of exemptions or reliefs).
Capital Acquisitions Tax. Irish capital acquisitions tax (which we refer to as CAT) applies to
gifts and inheritances. Subject to certain tax-free thresholds (which are determined by the
relationship between the donor and successor or donee), gifts and inheritances are liable to tax at
25%. Gifts and inheritances passing between spouses are exempt from CAT.
Where a gift or inheritance is taken under a disposition made on or after 1 December 1999, it will
be within the charge of CAT:
|
|
to the extent that the property of which the gift or inheritance consists is situated in
Ireland at the date of the gift or inheritance; |
|
|
|
where the person making the gift or inheritance is or was resident or ordinarily resident
in Ireland at the date of the disposition under which the gift or inheritance is taken; |
|
|
|
in the case of an appointment from a discretionary trust where the person who settled the
assets on trust was resident or ordinarily resident in Ireland (i) at the date he made the
settlement, or (ii) at the date of the appointment of the property from the trust or, (iii) if
the appointment occurs after his death, at the date of his death; or |
|
|
|
where the person receiving the gift or inheritance is resident or ordinarily resident in
Ireland at the date of the gift or inheritance. |
163
A non-Irish domiciled individual will not be regarded as resident or ordinarily resident in Ireland
for CAT purposes on a particular date unless they are resident or ordinarily resident in Ireland on
that date and have been resident in Ireland for the 5 consecutive tax years immediately preceding
the year of assessment in which the date falls.
A gift or inheritance of our common stock will be within the charge of CAT, notwithstanding that
the person from whom or by whom the gift or inheritance is received is domiciled or resident
outside Ireland.
The Estate Tax Convention between Ireland and the United States generally provides for CAT paid on
inheritances in Ireland to be credited against US federal estate tax payable in the United States
and for tax paid in the United States to be credited against tax payable in Ireland, based on
priority rules set forth in the Estate Tax Convention. The Estate Tax Convention does not apply to
CAT paid on gifts. Irish domestic legislation also provides for a general relief from double
taxation in respect of gifts and inheritances.
Irish Stamp Duty. Any electronic transfers of shares through the CHESS or the ADR system will be
treated as exempt from stamp duty in Ireland. If a shareholder undertakes an off-market transaction
involving a transfer of the underlying shares, this will be subject to Irish stamp duty at a rate
of 1% of market value or consideration paid, whichever is greater and will not be able to be
registered until duly stamped. An off-market transfer of CUFS will also, where evidenced in
writing, be subject to the 1% Irish stamp duty. In addition a conversion of shares into CUFS or
ADSs or a conversion of CUFS or ADSs into underlying shares will be liable to 1% Irish stamp duty
where the conversion is on a sale or in contemplation of a sale. In each case, payment of this
stamp duty will be the responsibility of the person receiving the transfer.
Documents Available for Review
We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act applicable to foreign private
issuers and in accordance therewith file reports, including annual reports, and other information
with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Such reports and other information have been
filed electronically with the SEC since 4 November 2002. The SEC maintains a site on the Internet,
at www.sec.gov, which contains reports and other information regarding issuers that file
electronically with the SEC. In addition, such reports may be obtained, upon written request, from
our company secretary at our Corporate Headquarters in Ireland or our Investor Relations department
in Australia. Such reports and other information filed with the SEC prior to November 2002 may be
inspected and copied at prescribed rates at the public reference facilities maintained by the SEC
at 100 F Street N.E., Washington, D.C. 20549, or obtained by written request to our company
secretary. Although, as a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from the rules under the Exchange
Act prescribing the furnishing and content of proxy statements and annual reports to shareholders
and the quarterly reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, we:
|
|
|
furnish our shareholders with annual reports containing consolidated financial
statements examined by an independent registered public accounting firm; and |
|
|
|
|
furnish quarterly reports for the first three quarters of each fiscal year containing
unaudited consolidated financial information in filings with the SEC under Form 6-K. |
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
Cash and cash equivalents include amounts on deposit in banks and cash invested temporarily in
various highly liquid financial instruments with original maturities of three month or less when
acquired.
We have operations in foreign countries and, as a result, are exposed to foreign currency exchange
rate risk inherent in purchases, sales, assets and liabilities denominated in currencies other than
the US dollar.
164
We also are exposed to interest rate risk associated with our long-term debt and to changes in
prices of commodities we use in production.
Periodically, interest rate swaps, commodity swaps and forward exchange contracts are used to
manage market risks and reduce exposure resulting from fluctuations in interest rates, commodity
prices and foreign currency exchange rates. Our policy is to enter into derivative instruments
solely to mitigate risks in our business and not for trading or speculative purposes.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk
We have significant operations outside of the United States and, as a result, are exposed to
changes in exchange rates which affect our financial position, results of operations and cash flow.
In addition, payments to the AICF are required to be made in Australian dollars which, because the
majority of our revenues is produced in US dollars, exposes us to risks associated with
fluctuations in the US dollar/Australian dollar exchange rate. See Risk Factors.
For our fiscal year ended 31 March 2011, the following currencies comprised the following
percentages of our net sales, expenses and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US$ |
|
A$ |
|
NZ$ |
|
Other (1) |
Net sales |
|
|
67.6 |
% |
|
|
22.8 |
% |
|
|
4.5 |
% |
|
|
5.1 |
% |
Expenses (2) |
|
|
61.5 |
% |
|
|
29.7 |
% |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
|
|
4.9 |
% |
Liabilities (excluding borrowings) (2) |
|
|
11.7 |
% |
|
|
86.5 |
% |
|
|
1.4 |
% |
|
|
0.4 |
% |
For our fiscal year ended 31 March 2010, the following currencies comprised the following
percentages of our net sales, cost of goods sold, expenses and liabilities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
US$ |
|
A$ |
|
NZ$ |
|
Other (1) |
Net sales |
|
|
71.9 |
% |
|
|
19.1 |
% |
|
|
4.5 |
% |
|
|
4.5 |
% |
Expenses (2) |
|
|
55.9 |
% |
|
|
36.5 |
% |
|
|
3.7 |
% |
|
|
3.9 |
% |
Liabilities (excluding borrowings) (2) |
|
|
44.2 |
% |
|
|
54.4 |
% |
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
0.8 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Comprised of Philippine Pesos and Euros. |
|
(2) |
|
Liabilities include A$ denominated asbestos liability, which was initially recorded in the
fourth quarter of fiscal year 2006. Expenses include cost of goods sold, selling general and
administrative expenses, research and development expenses and adjustments to the liability.
See Risk Factors, Commitment to Provide Funding on a Long-Term Basis in Respect of
Asbestos-Related Liabilities of Former Subsidiaries, and Note 11 of our consolidated
financial statements in Section 2 for further information regarding the asbestos liability. |
We purchase raw materials and fixed assets and sell some finished product for amounts
denominated in currencies other than the functional currency of the business in which the related
transaction is generated. In order to protect against foreign exchange rate movements, we may enter
into forward exchange contracts timed to mature when settlement of the underlying transaction is
due to occur. As of 31 March 2011, there were no material contracts outstanding.
Funding Under the AFFA
The A$ to US$ assets and liabilities rate moved unfavourably for us from 1.0919 as of 31 March 2010
to 0.9676 as of 31 March 2011, a 13% movement, resulting in a US$85.8 million unfavourable impact,
net of changes in actuarial estimates, on our fiscal year 2011 net income. Assuming that our
unfunded net AFFA liability in Australian dollars remains unchanged at A$923.8 million and that we
do not hedge this foreign exchange exposure, a 10% favourable or unfavourable movement in the A$ to
US$ exchange rate (at the
165
31 March 2011 exchange rate of 0.9676) would have approximately a US$86.8 million and US$106.1
million favourable and unfavourable impact, respectively, on our net income.
For fiscal year 2010, assuming that our unfunded net AFFA liability in Australian dollars remained
unchanged at A$991.9 million and that we did not hedge this foreign exchange exposure, a 10%
favourable or unfavourable movement in the A$ to US$ exchange rate (at the 31 March 2010 exchange
rate of 1.0919) would have had approximately an US$82.5 million and US$101.0 million favourable and
unfavourable impact, respectively, on our net income.
Interest Rate Risk
We have market risk from changes in interest rates, primarily related to our borrowings. As of 31
March 2011 and 2010, all of our borrowings were variable rate. From time to time, we may enter into
interest rate swap contracts in an effort to mitigate interest rate risk. As of 31 March 2011, we
had interest rate swap contracts with a total notional principal of US$200.0 million and a fair
value of US$6.1 million, which are included in Accounts Payable. For all of these interest rate
swap contracts, we have agreed to pay fixed interest rates while receiving the floating interest
rate. These contracts were entered into to protect against upward movements in LIBOR and the
associated interest the Company pays on its external debt.
An assumed 10 basis point move in the interest rates applicable to our borrowings (a 10 percent
move against our weighted-average floating rate interest rates as of 31 March 2011) would have had
a 0.1% change on our fiscal year 2011 income before income taxes.
For fiscal year 2010, an assumed 9 basis point move in the interest rates applicable to our
borrowings (a 10 percent move against our weighted-average floating rate interest rates as of 31
March 2010) would have had a 0.8% change on our fiscal year 2010 income before income taxes.
Commodity Price Risk
We are exposed to changes in prices of commodities used in our operations, primarily associated
with energy, fuel and raw materials such as pulp and cement. Pulp has historically demonstrated
more price sensitivity than other raw materials that we use in our manufacturing process. We expect
that pulp prices will rise and that energy, fuel and cement prices will also fluctuate in the near
future. To minimise the additional working capital requirements caused by rising prices related to
these commodities, we have entered into various contracts that discount pulp prices in relation to
pulp indices and purchase our pulp from several qualified suppliers in an attempt to mitigate price
increases and supply interruptions. However, if such commodity prices do not continue to rise, our
cost of sales may be negatively impacted due to fixed pricing over the longer-term.
We have assessed the market risk for pulp and believe that, a US$109 per metric ton movement in
market pulp prices, which represents approximately 10% of the average NBSK average pulp price for
the year ended 31 March 2011, would have had approximately a 1.3% change in our cost of sales in
fiscal year 2011. We have also assessed the market risk for cement and believe that, a US$9 per
metric ton price movement in cement prices, which represents approximately 10% of the market cement
price at 31 March 2011, would have had approximately a 0.5% change in cost of sales in fiscal year
2011.
For fiscal year 2010, we had assessed the market risk for pulp and believe that, a US$100 per
metric ton movement in market pulp prices, which represented approximately 10% of the market pulp
price at 31 March 2010, would have had approximately a 1.6% change in our cost of sales in fiscal
year 2010. We also assessed the market risk for cement and believe that, a US$9 per metric ton
price movement in cement prices, which represents approximately 10% of the market cement price at
31 March 2010, would have had approximately a 0.6% change in cost of sales in fiscal year 2010.
166
AMERICAN DEPOSITARY SHARES
We have listed our securities for trading on the NYSE. We sponsor a program whereby beneficial
ownership of five CUFS is represented by one ADS, which is issued by The Bank of New York Mellon.
These ADSs trade on the NYSE in the form of ADRs under the symbol JHX. Trading principally takes
place between the hours of 9:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on each weekday (excluding US
public holidays).
The following is a summary of the fee provisions of our deposit agreement with The Bank of New York
Mellon. For more complete information regarding ADRs, the entire deposit agreement should be read.
The deposit agreement, as amended, has been filed as an exhibit to this annual report as Exhibit
2.1.
|
|
|
Persons depositing or withdrawing share |
|
|
or ADS holders must pay: |
|
For: |
Taxes and other governmental charges
|
|
As necessary |
|
|
|
Registration or transfer fees
|
|
Transfer and registration of shares on
our share register to or from the name of
the depositary or its agent when you
deposit or withdraw shares |
|
|
|
Any charges incurred by the depositary or
its agents for servicing the deposited
securities
|
|
As necessary |
|
|
|
Expenses of the depositary
|
|
Converting foreign currency to US dollars |
|
|
|
$5.00 (or less) per 100 ADSs (or portion of
100 ADSs)
|
|
Execution and delivery of ADSs, including
issuances resulting from a distribution
of shares, rights, or other property |
|
|
|
$0.02 (or less) per ADS (or portion thereof)
|
|
Cash distributions and depositary services |
If any tax or other governmental charge becomes payable with respect to any security on deposit,
such tax or other governmental charge is payable by the ADS holder to the Depositary. The
Depositary may refuse to effect any transfer or withdrawal of a deposited security until such
payment is made. The Depositary may withhold any dividends or other distributions or may sell for
the account of the ADS holder any part or all of the deposited securities, and may apply such
dividends, other distributions, or proceeds of any such sale in payment of such tax or other
governmental charge and the ADS holder will remain liable for any deficiency.
All inquiries and correspondence regarding ADSs should be directed to The Bank of New York Mellon,
depository for our ADSs, at 101 Barclay Street, 22W, New York, NY 10286. To speak directly to a
Bank of New York Mellon representative, please call 1-888-BNY-ADRS (1-888-269-2377) if you are
calling from within the United States. If you are calling from outside the US, please call
201-680-6825. You may also send an e-mail inquiry to
[email protected] or visit
the website at
www.bnymellon.com/shareowner.
EXHIBITS
Documents filed as exhibits to this annual report:
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description of Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
Articles of Association dated 17 June 2010 of James Hardie Industries SE, a European
Company registered in Ireland (13) |
167
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description of Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
Deposit Agreement dated as of 24 September 2001, as amended and restated as of
19 February 2010 and as further amended on 17 June 2010, between James Hardie
Industries SE and The Bank of New York Mellon, as depositary (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Common Terms Deed Poll dated 6 October 2009 among James
Hardie International Finance B.V., James Hardie Building Products, Inc., James
Hardie International Finance Limited and James Hardie Industries N.V. (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Common Terms Deed Poll dated 21 December 2009 among James
Hardie International Finance Limited, James Hardie Building Products, Inc. and James
Hardie Industries N.V. (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
Form of 3 Year Term (Bullet) Facility Agreement dated 21 February 2008 among
James Hardie International Finance B.V., James Hardie Building Products, Inc. and
Financier (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
Form of 5 Year Term (Bullet) Facility Agreement dated 21 February 2008 among
James Hardie International Finance B.V., James Hardie Building Products, Inc. and
Financier (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
Form of Guarantee Deed between James Hardie Industries N.V. and Financier (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
Form of Lender Deeds of Confirmation dated 23 June 2009 between James Hardie
International Finance B.V., James Hardie Building Products, Inc., James Hardie
Industries N.V. and Financier (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
Form of Novation Deed dated 9 October 2009 between James Hardie International
Finance Limited, James Hardie International Finance B.V., James Hardie Building
Products, Inc., James Hardie Industries N.V. and Financier (14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
AET Guarantee Trust Deed dated 19 December 2006 between James Hardie Industries N.V.
and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.10 |
|
|
Amending Deed to the AET Guarantee Trust Deed dated 6 October 2009 between James
Hardie Industries N.V. and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.11 |
|
|
Performing Subsidiary Undertaking and Guarantee Trust Deed dated 19 December 2006
between James Hardie 117 Pty Limited and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited
(14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.12 |
|
|
Amending Deed to the Performing Subsidiary Undertaking and Guarantee Trust Deed
dated 6 October 2009 between James Hardie 117 Pty Limited and AET Structured Finance
Services Pty Limited (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.13 |
|
|
Form of Term Facility Agreement between James Hardie International Finance Limited
and Financier (9) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.14 |
|
|
Form of Term (Bullet) Facility
Agreement [entered into between James Hardie International Finance
Limited, James Hardie Building Products, Inc and Financier; James
Hardie International Finance Limited and Financier] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
Amended and Restated James Hardie Industries SE 2001 Equity Incentive Plan (10) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
Executive Incentive Plan 2009 (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
Amended and Restated James Hardie Industries SE Long Term Incentive Plan 2006 (12) |
168
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description of Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
Form of Joint and Several Indemnity Agreement among James Hardie N.V., James Hardie
(USA) Inc. and certain former executive officers and Managing Board directors
thereto (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
Form of Joint and Several Indemnity Agreement among James Hardie Industries N.V.,
James Hardie Inc. and certain former Supervisory Board and Managing Board directors
thereto (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
Form of Deed of Access, Insurance and Indemnity between James Hardie Industries N.V.
and Supervisory Board directors and Managing Board directors (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
Form of Indemnity Agreement between James Hardie Building Products, Inc. and
Supervisory Board directors, Managing Board directors and certain executive officers
(6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
Form of Irish law-governed Deed of Access, Insurance and Indemnity between James
Hardie Industries SE, a European Company registered in Ireland, and its directors,
company secretary and certain senior employees (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
Lease between Brookfield Multiplex Carole Park Landowner Pty Limited (f/k/a
Multiplex Carole Park Landowner Pty Limited), James Hardie Australia Pty Limited and
James Hardie Industries N.V. dated 18 October 2007 re Cobalt & Silica Street, Carole
Park, Queensland, Australia (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.10 |
|
|
Variation of Lease dated 23 March 2004, among Brookfield Multiplex Rosehill
Landowner Pty Ltd (f/k/a Multiplex Rosehill Landowner Pty Ltd) as successor in
interest to Amaca Pty Limited (f/k/a/ James Hardie & Coy Pty Limited), James Hardie
Australia Pty Limited and James Hardie Industries N.V. re premises at the corner of
Colquhoun & Devon Streets, Rosehill, New South Wales, Australia (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.11 |
|
|
Lease dated 3 April 2009, between Welshpool Landowner Pty and James Hardie Australia
Pty Limited re premises at Rutland Avenue, Welshpool, Western Australia, Australia
(7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.12 |
|
|
Lease Amendment dated 23 March 2004, among Brookfield Multiplex Meeandah Landowner
Pty Ltd (f/k/a Multiplex Meeandah Landowner Pty Ltd) as successor in interest to
Amaca Pty Limited (f/k/a James Hardie & Coy Pty Limited), James Hardie Australia Pty
Limited and James Hardie Industries N.V. re premises at 46 Randle Road, Meeandah,
Queensland, Australia (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.13 |
|
|
Lease Agreement dated 23 March 2004 among Location Group Limited as successor in
interest to Studorp Limited, James Hardie New Zealand Limited and James Hardie
Industries N.V. re premises at the corner of ORorke and Station Roads, Penrose,
Auckland, New Zealand (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.14 |
|
|
Lease Agreement dated 23 March 2004 among Location Group Limited as successor in
interest to Studorp Limited, James Hardie New Zealand Limited and James Hardie
Industries N.V. re premises at 44-74 ORorke Road, Penrose, Auckland, New Zealand
(1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.15 |
|
|
Ownership transfer related to corner of ORorke and Station Roads, Penrose,
Auckland, New Zealand and 44-74 ORorke Road, Penrose, Auckland, New Zealand
effective 30 June 2005 (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.16 |
|
|
Industrial Building Lease Agreement, effective 6 October 2000, between James Hardie
Building Products, Inc. and Fortra Fibre-Cement L.L.C., re premises at Waxahachie,
Ellis County, Texas (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.17 |
|
|
Asset Purchase Agreement by and between James Hardie Building Products, Inc. and
Cemplank, Inc. dated as of 12 December 2001 (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.18 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Stock Purchase Agreement dated 12 March 2002, between BPB US
Holdings, Inc. and James Hardie Inc. (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.19 |
|
|
Amended and Restated Final Funding Agreement dated 21 November 2006 (4) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.20 |
|
|
AFFA Amendment dated 6 August 2007 (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.21 |
|
|
AFFA Amendment dated 8 November 2007 (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.22 |
|
|
AFFA Amendment dated 11 June 2008 (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.23 |
|
|
Address for Service of Notice on Trustee dated 13 June 2008 (6) |
169
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description of Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.24 |
|
|
AFFA Amendment dated 17 July 2008 (7) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.25 |
|
|
Deed to amend the AFFA and facilitate the Authorised Loan Facility dated 9 December
2010 between James Hardie Industries SE, James Hardie 117 Pty Limited, The State of
New South Wales and Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund Limited in its capacity as
trustee of each of the Compensation Funds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.26 |
|
|
Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund Amended and Restated Trust Deed by and between
James Hardie Industries N.V. and Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund Limited dated
14 December 2006 (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.27 |
|
|
Deed Poll dated 11 June 2008 amendment of the Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund
Amended and Restated Trust Deed (6) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.28 |
|
|
Deed of Release by and among James Hardie Industries N.V., Australian Council of
Trade Unions, Unions New South Wales, and Bernard Douglas Banton dated 21 December
2005 (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.29 |
|
|
Amending Agreement (Parent Guarantee) dated 23 June 2009 by and among Asbestos
Injuries Compensation Fund Limited, The State of New South Wales, and James Hardie
Industries N.V. (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.30 |
|
|
Deed of Release by and between James Hardie Industries N.V. and The State of New
South Wales dated 22 June 2006 (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.31 |
|
|
Second Irrevocable Power of Attorney by and between Asbestos Injuries Compensation
Fund Limited and The State of New South Wales dated 14 December 2006 (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.32 |
|
|
Deed of Accession by and among Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund Limited, James
Hardie Industries N.V., James Hardie 117 Pty Limited, and The State of New South
Wales dated 14 December 2006 (5) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.33 |
|
|
Intercreditor Deed dated 19 December 2006 between The State of New South Wales,
James Hardie Industries N.V., Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund Limited and AET
Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.34 |
|
|
Letter agreement dated 21 March 2007 amending Intercreditor Deed between The State
of New South Wales, James Hardie Industries N.V., Asbestos Injuries Compensation
Fund Limited and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.35 |
|
|
Amending Deed (Intercreditor Deed) dated 23 June 2009 between The State of New South
Wales, James Hardie Industries N.V., Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund Limited and
AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.36 |
|
|
Performing Subsidiary Intercreditor Deed dated 19 December 2006 between The State of
New South Wales, James Hardie 117 Pty Limited, Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund
Limited and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.37 |
|
|
Letter agreement dated 21 March 2007 amending Performing Subsidiary Intercreditor
Deed between The State of New South Wales, James Hardie 117 Pty Limited, Asbestos
Injuries Compensation Fund Limited and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited
(14) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.38 |
|
|
Amending Deed (Performing Subsidiary Intercreditor Deed) dated 23 June 2009 between
The State of New South Wales, James Hardie 117 Pty Limited, Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund Limited and AET Structured Finance Services Pty Limited (15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.39 |
|
|
Deed of Confirmation dated 23 June 2009 between James Hardie Industries N.V., James
Hardie 117 Pty Limited, The State of New South Wales and Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund Limited in its capacity as trustee of the Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund (8) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.40 |
|
|
AICF facility agreement dated 9 December 2010 between Asbestos Injuries Compensation
Fund Limited, ABN 60 Pty Limited, Amaca Pty Ltd, Amaba Pty Ltd and The State of New
South Wales |
170
|
|
|
|
|
Exhibit |
|
|
Number |
|
Description of Exhibits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.41 |
|
|
Fixed and floating charge dated 9 December 2010 between Asbestos Injuries
Compensation Fund Limited, ABN 60 Pty Limited, Amaca Pty Ltd, Amaba Pty Ltd and The
State of New South Wales |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.42 |
|
|
Agreement on the Involvement of Employees dated 10 February 2010 between James
Hardie Industries N.V., JH CBM plc, James Hardie International Holdings N.V.,
JHIHCBM and the Special Negotiating Bodies (9) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8.1 |
|
|
List of significant subsidiaries of James Hardie Industries SE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
|
Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, independent registered public accounting firm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
15.2 |
|
|
Consent of KPMG Actuarial Pty Limited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
99.1 |
|
|
Excerpts of the ASX Settlement Operating Rules (formerly called the ASTC Settlement
Rules) as of 31 May 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
99.2 |
|
|
Subdivision B, Division 3 of Part 7.2 of the Corporations Act 2001 as of 31 May 2011 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
99.3 |
|
|
ASIC Class Order 02/311, dated 11 March 2002 (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
99.4 |
|
|
ASIC Modification, dated 7 March 2002 (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
99.5 |
|
|
ASIC Class Order 04/166, dated 26 February 2004 (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
101INS
|
|
Instance Document |
|
|
|
|
|
101SCH
|
|
Schema Document |
|
|
|
|
|
101CAL
|
|
Calculation Linkbase Document |
|
|
|
|
|
101LAB
|
|
Label Linkbase Document |
|
|
|
|
|
101PRE
|
|
Presentation Linkbase Document |
|
|
|
|
|
101DEF
|
|
Definition Linkbase Document |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 22 November 2004 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(2) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 7 July 2005 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(3) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 29 September 2006 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(4) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Current Report on Form 6-K dated 5 January 2007 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(5) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 6 July 2007 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(6) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 8 July 2008 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(7) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Form F-4 dated 23 June 2009 and incorporated herein by
reference. |
171
|
|
|
(8) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Amendment No. 2 to Form F-4 dated 10 July 2009 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(9) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Post Effective Amendment No. 1 to Form F-4 dated 19
February 2010 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(10) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Post Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form S-8
(Registration No. 333-14036) dated 17 June 2010 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(11) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Post Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form S-8
(Registration No. 333-153446) dated 17 June 2010 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(12) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Post Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form S-8
(Registration No. 333-161482) dated 17 June 2010 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(13) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Current Report on Form 6-K dated 18 June 2010 and
incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(14) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Post Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form F-4 dated 17
June 2010 and incorporated herein by reference. |
|
(15) |
|
Previously filed as an exhibit to our Annual Report on Form 20-F dated 30 June 2010 and
incorporate herein by reference. |
172
SIGNATURES
The registrant hereby certifies that it meets all of the requirements for filing on Form 20-F and
that it has duly caused and authorised the undersigned to sign this annual report on its behalf.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JAMES HARDIE INDUSTRIES SE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By:
|
|
/s/ Louis Gries
Louis Gries
|
|
|
Date: 29 June 2011
|
|
|
|
Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
173