XML 33 R20.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.19.3

Commitments and Contingencies | 9 Months Ended
--- | ---
Sep. 30, 2019
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract] |
Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies Litigation-Related Liability and Tax Administrative Matters In the normal course of our business, we are named from time to time as a defendant in various legal actions, including arbitrations, class actions and other litigation. We identify below the material individual proceedings and investigations where we believe a material loss is reasonably possible or probable. We accrue for matters when we believe that losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. At September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, we had accruals of $1.4 billion and $1.3 billion in Accrued liabilities and Other liabilities. In many matters, it is inherently difficult to determine whether loss is probable or reasonably possible or to estimate the size or range of the possible loss. Accordingly, adverse outcomes from such proceedings could exceed the amounts accrued by an amount that could be material to our results of operations or cash flows in any particular reporting period. Proceedings Related to Ignition Switch Recall and Other Recalls In 2014 we announced various recalls relating to safety and other matters. Those recalls included recalls to repair ignition switches that could, under certain circumstances, unintentionally move from the “run” position to the “accessory” or “off” position with a corresponding loss of power, which could in turn prevent airbags from deploying in the event of a crash. Economic-Loss Claims We are aware of over 100 putative class actions pending against GM in U.S. and Canadian courts alleging that consumers who purchased or leased vehicles manufactured by GM or Motors Liquidation Company (MLC), formerly known as General Motors Corporation, had been economically harmed by one or more of the 2014 recalls and/or the underlying vehicle conditions associated with those recalls (economic-loss cases). In general, these economic-loss cases seek recovery for purported compensatory damages, such as alleged benefit-of-the-bargain damages or damages related to alleged diminution in value of the vehicles, as well as punitive damages, injunctive relief and other relief. Many of the pending U.S. economic-loss claims have been transferred to, and consolidated in, a single federal court, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (Southern District). These plaintiffs have asserted economic-loss claims under federal and state laws, including claims relating to recalled vehicles manufactured by GM and claims asserting successor liability relating to certain recalled vehicles manufactured by MLC. In August 2017, the Southern District granted our motion to dismiss the successor liability claims of plaintiffs in seven of the sixteen states at issue on the motion and called for additional briefing to decide whether plaintiffs' claims can proceed in the other nine states. In December 2017, the Southern District granted GM's motion and dismissed the plaintiffs' successor liability claims in an additional state, but found that there are genuine issues of material fact that prevent summary judgment for GM in eight other states. In January 2018, GM moved for reconsideration of certain portions of the Southern District's December 2017 summary judgment ruling. That motion was granted in April 2018, dismissing plaintiffs' successor liability claims in any state where New York law applies. In September 2018, the Southern District granted our motion to dismiss claims for lost personal time (in 41 out of 47 jurisdictions) and certain unjust enrichment claims, but denied our motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ economic loss claims in 27 jurisdictions under the "manifest defect" rule. Significant summary judgment, class certification, and expert evidentiary motions remain at issue. In August 2019, the Southern District granted our motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ economic loss “benefit of the bargain” damage claims (Southern District’s August 2019 Opinion). The Southern District held that plaintiffs’ conjoint analysis-based damages model failed to establish that plaintiffs suffered difference-in-value damages and without such evidence, plaintiffs’ difference-in-value damage claims fail under the laws of all three bellwether states: California, Missouri and Texas. As a result, the Southern District adjourned the January 2020 bellwether trial date. Later in August 2019, the bellwether plaintiffs filed a motion requesting that the Southern District reconsider its summary judgment decision or allow an interlocutory appeal if reconsideration is denied. GM filed its opposition to plaintiffs’ motion in October 2019. In September 2019, GM filed an updated motion for summary judgment on plaintiffs’ remaining economic loss claims that were not addressed in the Southern District’s August 2019 Opinion and renewed its evidentiary motion seeking to strike the opinions of plaintiff’s expert on plaintiffs’ alleged “lost time” damages associated with having the recall repairs performed. Personal Injury Claims We also are aware of several hundred actions pending in various courts in the U.S. and Canada alleging injury or death as a result of defects that may be the subject of the 2014 recalls (personal injury cases). In general, these cases seek recovery for purported compensatory damages, punitive damages and/or other relief. Since 2016, several bellwether trials of personal injury cases have taken place in the Southern District and in a Texas state court, which is administering a Texas state multi-district litigation. None of these trials resulted in a finding of liability against GM. Appellate Litigation Regarding Successor Liability Ignition Switch Claims In 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the 2009 order of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (Bankruptcy Court) approving the sale of substantially all of the assets of MLC to GM free and clear of, among other things, claims asserting successor liability for obligations owed by MLC could not be enforced to bar claims against GM asserted by either plaintiffs who purchased used vehicles after the sale or against purchasers who asserted claims relating to the ignition switch defect, including pre-sale personal injury claims and economic-loss claims. Contingently Issuable Shares Under the Amended and Restated Master Sale and Purchase Agreement between GM and MLC, GM may be obligated to issue additional shares (Adjustment Shares) of our common stock if allowed general unsecured claims against the MLC GUC Trust (GUC Trust), as estimated by the Bankruptcy Court, exceed $35.0 billion. The maximum number of Adjustment Shares issuable is 30 million shares (subject to adjustment to take into account stock dividends, stock splits and other transactions), which amounts to approximately $1.1 billion based on the GM share price as of October 15, 2019. The GUC Trust stated in public filings that allowed general unsecured claims were approximately $31.9 billion at June 30, 2019. In 2016 and 2017, certain personal injury and economic-loss plaintiffs filed motions in the Bankruptcy Court seeking authority to file late claims against the GUC Trust. In May 2018, the GUC Trust filed motions seeking the Bankruptcy Court’s approval of a proposed settlement with certain personal injury and economic-loss plaintiffs, approval of a notice relating to that proposed settlement and estimation of alleged personal injury and economic-loss late claims for the purpose of obtaining an order requiring GM to issue the maximum number of Adjustment Shares. GM vigorously contested each of these motions. In September 2018, the Bankruptcy Court denied without prejudice the GUC Trust’s motions described above, finding that the settling parties first need to obtain class certification with respect to the economic loss late claims. In February 2019, the GUC Trust and certain plaintiffs filed a motion with the Bankruptcy Court requesting approval of a new settlement to obtain the maximum number of Adjustment Shares. In March 2019, we asserted several legal objections to this new settlement. In September 2019, the GUC Trust advised the Bankruptcy Court that it was formally terminating the February 2019 proposed class settlement with plaintiffs because it was no longer viable given the Southern District’s August 2019 Opinion and further briefing was moot. Government Matters In connection with the 2014 recalls, we have from time to time received subpoenas and other requests for information related to investigations by agencies or other representatives of U.S. federal, state and the Canadian governments. GM is cooperating with all reasonable pending requests for information. Any existing governmental matters or investigations could in the future result in the imposition of damages, fines, civil consent orders, civil and criminal penalties or other remedies. The total amount accrued for the 2014 recalls at September 30, 2019 reflects amounts for a combination of settled but unpaid matters, and for the remaining unsettled investigations, claims and/or lawsuits relating to the ignition switch recalls and other related recalls to the extent that such matters are probable and can be reasonably estimated. The amounts accrued for those unsettled investigations, claims, and/or lawsuits represent a combination of our best single point estimates where determinable and, where no such single point estimate is determinable, our estimate of the low end of the range of probable loss with regard to such matters, if that is determinable. We will continue to consider resolution of pending matters involving ignition switch recalls and other recalls where it makes sense to do so. GM Korea Wage Litigation GM Korea is party to litigation with current and former hourly employees in the appellate court and Incheon District Court in Incheon, Korea. The group actions, which in the aggregate involve more than 10,000 employees, allege that GM Korea failed to include bonuses and certain allowances in its calculation of Ordinary Wages due under Korean regulations. In 2012, the Seoul High Court (an intermediate-level appellate court) affirmed a decision in one of these group actions involving five GM Korea employees which was contrary to GM Korea's position. GM Korea appealed to the Supreme Court of the Republic of Korea (Korean Supreme Court). In 2014, the Korean Supreme Court largely agreed with GM’s legal arguments and remanded the case to the Seoul High Court for consideration consistent with earlier Korean Supreme Court precedent holding that while fixed bonuses should be included in the calculation of Ordinary Wages, claims for retroactive application of this rule would be barred under certain circumstances. In 2015, on reconsideration, the Seoul High Court held in GM Korea’s favor, after which the plaintiffs appealed to the Korean Supreme Court. The Korean Supreme Court has not yet rendered a decision. We estimate our reasonably possible loss in excess of amounts accrued to be approximately $570 million at September 30, 2019. Both the scope of claims asserted and GM Korea's assessment of any or all of the individual claim elements may change if new information becomes available or the legal or regulatory frameworks change. GM Korea is also party to litigation with current and former salaried employees over allegations relating to Ordinary Wages regulation and whether to include fixed bonuses in the calculation of Ordinary Wages. In 2017, the Seoul High Court held that certain workers are not barred from filing retroactive wage claims. GM Korea appealed this ruling to the Korean Supreme Court. The Korean Supreme Court has not yet rendered a decision. We estimate our reasonably possible loss in excess of amounts accrued to be approximately $160 million at September 30, 2019. Both the scope of claims asserted and GM Korea's assessment of any or all of the individual claim elements may change if new information becomes available or the legal or regulatory frameworks change. GM Korea is also party to litigation with current and former subcontract workers over allegations that they are entitled to the same wages and benefits provided to full-time employees, and to be hired as full-time employees. In May 2018, the Korean labor authorities issued an adverse administrative order finding that GM Korea must hire certain current subcontract workers as full-time employees. GM Korea appealed that order. At September 30, 2019, our accrual covering certain asserted claims and claims that we believe are probable of assertion and for which liability is probable was approximately $170 million, which was substantially consistent with prior period amounts. We estimate the reasonably possible loss in excess of amounts accrued for other current subcontract workers who may assert similar claims to be approximately $130 million at September 30, 2019. We are currently unable to estimate any possible loss or range of loss that may result from additional claims that may be asserted by former subcontract workers. GM Brazil Indirect Tax Claim In February and April 2019, the Superior Judicial Court of Brazil rendered favorable decisions on a case brought by GM Brazil challenging whether a certain state value-added tax should be included in the calculation of federal gross receipts taxes. The decisions will allow the Company the right to recover, through offset of federal tax liabilities, amounts collected by the government from August 2001 to December 2014. As a result of the favorable decisions, we recorded pre-tax recoveries of $857 million and $380 million in Automotive and other cost of sales in the three months ended March 31, 2019 and June 30, 2019. In August 2019, the Superior Judicial Court of Brazil rendered a favorable decision on another GM Brazil case, granting GM Brazil the right to recover tax amounts collected by the government from January 2015 to February 2017. We recorded pre-tax recoveries of $123 million in Automotive and other cost of sales in the three months ended September 30, 2019. Timing on realization of these recoveries is dependent upon the timing of administrative approvals and generation of federal tax liabilities eligible for offset. The Brazilian IRS request for a Motion of Clarification on this matter has been scheduled to be determined by the Brazilian Supreme Court as early as December 2019. In addition, we expect third parties to make claims on some or all of the pre-tax recoveries, which GM intends to defend against. Other Litigation-Related Liability and Tax Administrative Matters Various other legal actions, including class actions, governmental investigations, claims and proceedings are pending against us or our related companies or joint ventures, including matters arising out of alleged product defects; employment-related matters; product and workplace safety, vehicle emissions and fuel economy regulations; product warranties; financial services; dealer, supplier and other contractual relationships; government regulations relating to competition issues; tax-related matters not subject to the provision of Accounting Standards Codification 740, Income Taxes (indirect tax-related matters); product design, manufacture and performance; consumer protection laws; and environmental protection laws, including laws regulating air emissions, water discharges, waste management and environmental remediation from stationary sources. There are several putative class actions pending against GM in federal courts in the U.S., the Provincial Courts in Canada and Israel alleging that various vehicles sold, including model year 2011-2016 Duramax Diesel Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra vehicles, violate federal, state and foreign emission standards. GM has also faced a series of additional lawsuits based primarily on allegations in the Duramax suit, including putative shareholder class actions claiming violations of federal securities law and a shareholder demand lawsuit. The securities lawsuits have been voluntarily dismissed by the plaintiffs in those actions. At this stage of these proceedings, we are unable to provide an evaluation of the likelihood that a loss will be incurred or an estimate of the amounts or range of possible loss. We believe that appropriate accruals have been established for losses that are probable and can be reasonably estimated. It is possible that the resolution of one or more of these matters could exceed the amounts accrued in an amount that could be material to our results of operations. We also from time to time receive subpoenas and other inquiries or requests for information from agencies or other representatives of U.S. federal, state and foreign governments on a variety of issues. Indirect tax-related matters are being litigated globally pertaining to value added taxes, customs, duties, sales, property taxes and other non-income tax related tax exposures. The various non-U.S. labor-related matters include claims from current and former employees related to alleged unpaid wage, benefit, severance and other compensation matters. Certain administrative proceedings are indirect tax-related and may require that we deposit funds in escrow or provide an alternative form of security which may range from $200 million to $500 million at September 30, 2019. Some of the matters may involve compensatory, punitive or other treble damage claims, environmental remediation programs or sanctions that, if granted, could require us to pay damages or make other expenditures in amounts that could not be reasonably estimated at September 30, 2019. We believe that appropriate accruals have been established for losses that are probable and can be reasonably estimated. For indirect tax-related matters we estimate our reasonably possible loss in excess of amounts accrued to be up to approximately $900 million at September 30, 2019. Takata Matters In May 2016, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued an amended consent order requiring Takata to file defect information reports (DIRs) for previously unrecalled front airbag inflators that contain phased-stabilized ammonium nitrate-based propellant without a moisture absorbing desiccant on a multi-year, risk-based schedule through 2019 impacting tens of millions of vehicles produced by numerous automotive manufacturers. NHTSA concluded that the likely root cause of the rupturing of the airbag inflators is a function of time, temperature cycling and environmental moisture. Although we do not believe there is a safety defect at this time in any unrecalled GM vehicles within scope of the Takata DIRs, in cooperation with NHTSA we have filed Preliminary DIRs covering certain of our GMT900 vehicles, which are full-size pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles (SUVs). We have also filed petitions for inconsequentiality with respect to the vehicles subject to those Preliminary DIRs. NHTSA has consolidated our petitions and will rule on them at the same time. While these petitions have been pending, we have provided NHTSA with the results of our long-term studies and the studies performed by third-party experts, all of which form the basis for our determination that the inflators in these vehicles do not present an unreasonable risk to safety and that no repair should ultimately be required. We believe these vehicles are currently performing as designed and our inflator aging studies and field data support the belief that the vehicles' unique design and integration mitigates against inflator propellant degradation and rupture risk. For example, the airbag inflators used in the vehicles are a variant engineered specifically for our vehicles, and include features such as greater venting, unique propellant wafer configurations, and machined steel end caps. The inflators are packaged in the instrument panel in such a way as to minimize exposure to moisture from the climate control system. Also, these vehicles have features that minimize the maximum temperature to which the inflator will be exposed, such as larger interior volumes and standard solar absorbing windshields and side glass. Accordingly, no warranty provision has been made for any repair associated with our vehicles subject to the Preliminary DIRs and amended consent order. However, in the event we are ultimately obligated to repair the vehicles subject to current or future Takata DIRs under the amended consent order in the U.S., we estimate a reasonably possible impact to GM of approximately $1.2 billion. GM has recalled certain vehicles sold outside of the U.S. to replace Takata inflators in those vehicles. There are significant differences in vehicle and inflator design between the relevant vehicles sold internationally and those sold in the U.S. We continue to gather and analyze evidence about these inflators and to share our findings with regulators. Additional recalls, if any, could be material to our results of operations and cash flows. We continue to monitor the international situation. Through October 15, 2019 we are aware of five putative class actions filed against GM in federal court in the U.S., one putative class action in Mexico, one putative class action in Israel and three putative class actions pending in various Provincial Courts in Canada arising out of allegations that airbag inflators manufactured by Takata are defective. At this early stage of these proceedings, we are unable to provide an evaluation of the likelihood that a loss will be incurred or an estimate of the amounts or range of possible loss. Product Liability We recorded liabilities of $547 million and $531 million in Accrued liabilities and Other liabilities at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018 for the expected cost of all known product liability claims, plus an estimate of the expected cost for product liability claims that have already been incurred and are expected to be filed in the future for which we are self-insured. It is reasonably possible that our accruals for product liability claims may increase in future periods in material amounts, although we cannot estimate a reasonable range of incremental loss based on currently available information. Other than claims relating to the ignition switch recalls discussed above, we believe that any judgment against us involving our and MLC products for actual damages will be adequately covered by our recorded accruals and, where applicable, excess liability insurance coverage. Guarantees We enter into indemnification agreements for liability claims involving products manufactured primarily by certain joint ventures. These guarantees terminate in years ranging from 2019 to 2024 or upon the occurrence of specific events or are ongoing. We believe that the related potential costs incurred are adequately covered by our recorded accruals, which are insignificant. The maximum future undiscounted payments mainly based on vehicles sold to date were $2.7 billion and $2.4 billion for these guarantees at September 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the majority of which relates to the indemnification agreements. We provide payment guarantees on commercial loans outstanding with third parties such as dealers. In some instances, certain assets of the party or our payables to the party whose debt or performance we have guaranteed may offset, to some degree, the amount of any potential future payments. We are also exposed to residual value guarantees associated with certain sales to rental car companies. We periodically enter into agreements that incorporate indemnification provisions in the normal course of business. It is not possible to estimate our maximum exposure under these indemnifications or guarantees due to the conditional nature of these obligations. Insignificant amounts have been recorded for such obligations as the majority of them are not probable or estimable at this time and the fair value of the guarantees at issuance was insignificant. Refer to Note 18 for additional information on our indemnification obligations to PSA Group under the Master Agreement (the Agreement) between GM and PSA Group. Operating Leases Our portfolio of leases primarily consists of real estate office space, manufacturing and warehousing facilities, land and equipment. Certain leases contain escalation clauses and renewal or purchase options, and generally our leases have no residual value guarantees or material covenants. We exclude leases with a term of one year or less from our balance sheet, and do not separate non-lease components from our real estate leases. Rent expense under operating leases was $84 million and $266 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019. Variable lease costs were insignificant in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2019. At September 30, 2019 operating lease right of use assets in Other assets were $1.2 billion, operating lease liabilities in Accrued liabilities were $243 million and non-current operating lease liabilities in Other liabilities were $1.0 billion. Operating lease right of use assets obtained in exchange for lease obligations were $470 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2019. Our undiscounted future lease obligations related to operating leases having initial terms in excess of one year are $67 million for the three months ending December 31, 2019 and $270 million, $246 million, $178 million, $166 million and $582 million for the years 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and thereafter, with imputed interest of $217 million at September 30, 2019. The weighted average discount rate was 4.2% and the weighted-average remaining lease term was 7.3 years at September 30, 2019. Payments for operating leases included in Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities were $271 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2019. Lease agreements that have not yet commenced were insignificant at September 30, 2019.

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments, contingencies, and guarantees. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 460 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2155896 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 3: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsContingenciesAndGuaranteesTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration