10-Q 1 cprt10312016-10q.htm 10-Q
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
x Quarterly report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
for the quarterly period ended October 31, 2016
OR
o Transition report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
for the transition period from to
Commission file number: 000-23255
COPART, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

| Delaware |  | 94-2867490 |
| (State or other jurisdiction |  | (IRS Employer |
| of incorporation) |  | Identification No.) |

14185 Dallas Parkway, Suite 300, Dallas, Texas 75254
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)
(972) 391-5000
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
N/A
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES x NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). YES x NO o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer | x |  | Accelerated filer | ¨
Non-accelerated filer | ¨ | (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | Smaller reporting company | ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES ¨ NO x
As of November 29, 2016, 114,586,095 shares of the registrant’s common stock were outstanding.

Copart, Inc.
Index to the Quarterly Report
October 31, 2016

Table of Contents |  | Page Number
PART I - Financial Information |  |
Item 1 - Financial Statements (Unaudited) |  |
Consolidated Balance Sheets |  | 3
Consolidated Statements of Income |  | 4
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income |  | 5
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows |  | 6
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements |  | 7
Item 2 - Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations |  |
Overview |  | 19
Acquisitions and New Operations |  | 21
Results of Operations |  | 22
Liquidity and Capital Resources |  | 24
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates |  | 28
Recently Issued Accounting Standards |  | 28
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements |  | 28
Item 3 - Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |  | 28
Item 4 - Controls and Procedures |  |
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures |  | 28
Changes in Internal Controls |  | 29
PART II - Other Information |  |
Item 1 - Legal Proceedings |  | 30
Item 1A - Risk Factors |  | 31
Item 2 - Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds |  | 43
Item 6 - Exhibits |  | 43
Signatures |  | 44

Copart, Inc.
Consolidated Balance Sheets
(Unaudited)

(In thousands, except share amounts) |  | October 31, 2016 |  | July 31, 2016
ASSETS |  |  |  |
Current assets: |  |  |  |
Cash and cash equivalents |  | $ | 168,421 |  |  | $ | 155,849 |
Accounts receivable, net |  | 294,358 |  |  | 266,270 |
Vehicle pooling costs |  | 31,284 |  |  | 28,599 |
Inventories |  | 8,918 |  |  | 10,388 |
Income taxes receivable |  | 110,923 |  |  | 18,751 |
Deferred income taxes |  | 711 |  |  | 1,444 |
Prepaid expenses and other assets |  | 16,096 |  |  | 18,005 |
Total current assets |  | 630,711 |  |  | 499,306 |
Property and equipment, net |  | 840,587 |  |  | 816,791 |
Intangibles, net |  | 10,241 |  |  | 11,761 |
Goodwill |  | 255,093 |  |  | 260,198 |
Deferred income taxes |  | 1,912 |  |  | 23,506 |
Other assets |  | 31,852 |  |  | 38,258 |
Total assets |  | $ | 1,770,396 |  |  | $ | 1,649,820 |
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY |  |  |  |
Current liabilities: |  |  |  |
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |  | $ | 175,969 |  |  | $ | 192,379 |
Deferred revenue |  | 3,975 |  |  | 4,628 |
Income taxes payable |  | 6,583 |  |  | 5,625 |
Current portion of revolving loan facility and capital lease obligations |  | 171,151 |  |  | 76,151 |
Total current liabilities |  | 357,678 |  |  | 278,783 |
Deferred income taxes |  | 3,380 |  |  | 3,816 |
Income taxes payable |  | 26,867 |  |  | 25,641 |
Long-term debt, revolving loan facility and capital lease obligations, net of discount |  | 573,030 |  |  | 564,341 |
Other liabilities |  | 2,034 |  |  | 2,783 |
Total liabilities |  | 962,989 |  |  | 875,364 |
Commitments and contingencies |  |  |  |
Stockholders’ equity: |  |  |  |
Preferred stock: $0.0001 par value - 5,000,000 shares authorized; none issued |  | — |  |  | — |
Common stock: $0.0001 par value - 400,000,000 shares authorized; 114,511,998 and 110,122,060 shares issued and outstanding, respectively. |  | 11 |  |  | 11 |
Additional paid-in capital |  | 416,125 |  |  | 392,445 |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss |  | (127,969 | ) |  | (109,194 | )
Retained earnings |  | 519,240 |  |  | 491,194 |
Total stockholders’ equity |  | 807,407 |  |  | 774,456 |
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity |  | $ | 1,770,396 |  |  | $ | 1,649,820 |

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
3

Copart, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Income
(Unaudited)

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands, except per share amounts) |  | 2016 |  | 2015
Service revenues and vehicle sales: |  |  |  |
Service revenues |  | $ | 307,078 |  |  | $ | 250,967 |
Vehicle sales |  | 38,913 |  |  | 37,871 |
Total service revenues and vehicle sales |  | 345,991 |  |  | 288,838 |
Operating expenses: |  |  |  |
Yard operations |  | 167,611 |  |  | 135,909 |
Cost of vehicle sales |  | 33,087 |  |  | 32,068 |
General and administrative |  | 40,469 |  |  | 34,615 |
Total operating expenses |  | 241,167 |  |  | 202,592 |
Operating income |  | 104,824 |  |  | 86,246 |
Other (expense) income: |  |  |  |
Interest expense |  | (5,959 | ) |  | (5,724 | )
Interest income |  | 337 |  |  | 211 |
Other income, net |  | 3,332 |  |  | 1,027 |
Total other expenses |  | (2,290 | ) |  | (4,486 | )
Income before income taxes |  | 102,534 |  |  | 81,760 |
Income tax (benefit) expense |  | (64,746 | ) |  | 29,150 |
Net income |  | $ | 167,280 |  |  | $ | 52,610 |
Basic net income per common share |  | $ | 1.48 |  |  | $ | 0.44 |
Weighted average common shares outstanding |  | 112,718 |  |  | 120,155 |
Diluted net income per common share |  | $ | 1.41 |  |  | $ | 0.41 |
Diluted weighted average common shares outstanding |  | 118,879 |  |  | 127,144 |

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
4

Copart, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income
(Unaudited)

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015
Comprehensive income, net of tax: |  |  |  |
Net income |  | $ | 167,280 |  |  | $ | 52,610 |
Other comprehensive income: |  |  |  |
Unrealized gain on interest rate swaps, net (a) |  | — |  |  | 440 |
Reclassification adjustment of interest rate swaps, net (b) |  | — |  |  | (219 | )
Unrealized gain on available-for-sale securities, net (c) |  | — |  |  | 495 |
Foreign currency translation adjustments |  | (18,775 | ) |  | (6,663 | )
Total comprehensive income |  | $ | 148,505 |  |  | $ | 46,663 |

(a) | Net of tax effect of $(191) for the three months ended October 31, 2015.

(b) | Net of tax effect of $122 for the three months ended October 31, 2015.

(c) | Net of tax effect of $(279) for the three months ended October 31, 2015.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
5

Copart, Inc.
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
(Unaudited)

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015
Cash flows from operating activities: |  |  |  |
Net income |  | $ | 167,280 |  |  | $ | 52,610 |
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |  |  |  |
Depreciation and amortization, including debt cost |  | 14,820 |  |  | 11,562 |
Allowance for doubtful accounts |  | 22 |  |  | 1,032 |
Equity in losses of unconsolidated affiliates |  | 349 |  |  | 158 |
Stock-based payment compensation |  | 5,085 |  |  | 5,414 |
Loss (gain) on sale of property and equipment |  | 38 |  |  | (60 | )
Deferred income taxes |  | 22,088 |  |  | (870 | )
Changes in operating assets and liabilities: |  |  |  |
Accounts receivable |  | (29,472 | ) |  | (16,910 | )
Vehicle pooling costs |  | (2,935 | ) |  | (1,741 | )
Inventories |  | 1,152 |  |  | (511 | )
Prepaid expenses and other current assets |  | 1,392 |  |  | (1,115 | )
Other assets |  | (202 | ) |  | (1,036 | )
Accounts payable and accrued liabilities |  | (14,828 | ) |  | 77 |
Deferred revenue |  | (602 | ) |  | (5 | )
Income taxes receivable |  | (92,172 | ) |  | 5,136 |
Income taxes payable |  | 2,615 |  |  | 23,483 |
Other liabilities |  | (337 | ) |  | (433 | )
Net cash provided by operating activities |  | 74,293 |  |  | 76,791 |
Cash flows from investing activities: |  |  |  |
Purchases of property and equipment |  | (38,209 | ) |  | (20,167 | )
Proceeds from sale of property and equipment |  | 85 |  |  | 343 |
Proceeds from sale of assets held for sale |  | 105 |  |  | 100 |
Investment in unconsolidated affiliate |  | (1,050 | ) |  | — |
Purchases of marketable securities |  | — |  |  | (21,119 | )
Net cash used in investing activities |  | (39,069 | ) |  | (40,843 | )
Cash flows from financing activities: |  |  |  |
Proceeds from the exercise of stock options |  | 13,977 |  |  | 368 |
Payments for employee stock-based tax withholdings |  | (134,615 | ) |  | — |
Proceeds from revolving loan facility, net of repayments |  | 103,900 |  |  | — |
Principal payments on long-term debt |  | — |  |  | (18,750 | )
Net cash used in financing activities |  | (16,738 | ) |  | (18,382 | )
Effect of foreign currency translation |  | (5,914 | ) |  | (662 | )
Net increase in cash and cash equivalents |  | 12,572 |  |  | 16,904 |
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |  | 155,849 |  |  | 456,012 |
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |  | $ | 168,421 |  |  | $ | 472,916 |
Supplemental disclosure of cash flow information: |  |  |  |
Interest paid |  | $ | 5,428 |  |  | $ | 5,723 |
Income taxes paid, net of refunds |  | $ | 2,677 |  |  | $ | 1,292 |

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
6

Copart, Inc.
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
October 31, 2016
(Unaudited)
NOTE 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Basis of Presentation and Description of Business
Copart, Inc. (the Company) provides vehicle sellers with a full range of services to process and sell vehicles over the Internet through the Company’s Virtual Bidding Third Generation (VB3) Internet auction-style sales technology. Sellers are primarily insurance companies but also include banks and financial institutions, charities, car dealerships, fleet operators, vehicle rental companies, as well as cars sourced from the general public. The Company sells principally to licensed vehicle dismantlers, rebuilders, repair licensees, used vehicle dealers, and exporters; however, at certain locations, the Company sells directly to the general public. The majority of vehicles sold on behalf of insurance companies are either damaged vehicles deemed a total loss or not economically repairable by the insurance companies or are recovered stolen vehicles for which an insurance settlement with the vehicle owner has already been made. The Company offers vehicle sellers a full range of services that expedite each stage of the vehicle sales process, minimize administrative and processing costs and maximize the ultimate sales price. In the United States (U.S.), Canada, Brazil, the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.), Oman, Bahrain, Germany, Ireland, Spain and India, the Company sells vehicles primarily as an agent and derives revenue primarily from fees paid by vehicle sellers and vehicle buyers as well as related fees for services, such as towing and storage. In the United Kingdom (U.K.), the Company operates both as an agent and on a principal basis, purchasing the salvage vehicle outright from the insurance company and reselling the vehicle for its own account. In Germany and Spain, the Company also derives revenue from sales listing fees for listing vehicles on behalf of insurance companies.
Principles of Consolidation
In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments of a normal recurring nature considered necessary for fair presentation of its financial position as of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016, its consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015, and its cash flows for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015. Interim results for the three months ended October 31, 2016 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for any future period, or for the entire year ending July 31, 2017. These consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to such rules and regulations. The interim consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2016. Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified to conform to current year presentation.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, 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. Estimates include, but are not limited to, vehicle pooling costs; self-insured reserves; allowance for doubtful accounts; income taxes; revenue recognition; stock-based payment compensation; purchase price allocations; long-lived asset and goodwill impairment calculations; and contingencies. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Revenue Recognition
The Company provides a portfolio of services to its sellers and buyers that facilitate the sale and delivery of a vehicle from seller to buyer. These services include the ability to use the Company’s Internet sales technology and vehicle delivery, loading, title processing, preparation and storage. The Company evaluates multiple-element arrangements relative to its member and seller agreements.
The services provided to the seller of a vehicle involve disposing of a vehicle on the seller’s behalf and, under most of the Company’s current contracts, collecting the proceeds from the member. The Company applies Accounting Standard Update 2009-13, Revenue Recognition (Topic 605): Multiple-Deliverable Revenue Arrangements (ASU 2009-13) for revenue recognition. Pre-sale services, including towing, title processing, preparation and storage, as well as sale fees and other enhancement services meet the criteria for separate units of accounting. Revenue associated with each service is recognized upon completion of the respective service, net of applicable rebates or allowances. For certain sellers who are charged a proportionate fee based on the high bid of the vehicle, the revenue associated with the pre-sale services is recognized upon completion of the sale when the total arrangement is fixed and determinable. The estimated selling price of each service is determined based on management’s best estimate and allotted based on the relative selling price method.
7

Vehicle sales, where vehicles are purchased and remarketed on the Company’s own behalf, are recognized on the sale date, which is typically the point of high bid acceptance. Upon high bid acceptance, a legal binding contract is formed with the member, and the gross sales price is recorded as revenue.
The Company also provides a number of services to the buyer of the vehicle, charging a separate fee for each service. Each of these services has been assessed to determine whether the requirements have been met to separate them into units of accounting within a multiple-element arrangement. The Company has concluded that the sale and the post-sale services are separate units of accounting. The fees for sale services are recognized upon completion of the sale, and the fees for the post-sale services are recognized upon successful completion of those services using the relative selling price method.
The Company also charges members an annual registration fee for the right to participate in its vehicle sales program, which is recognized ratably over the term of the arrangement, and relist and late-payment fees, which are recognized upon receipt of payment by the member. No provision for returns has been established, as all sales are final with no right of return, although the Company provides for bad debt expense in the case of non-performance by its members or sellers.
The Company allocates arrangement consideration based upon management’s best estimate of the selling price of the separate units of accounting contained within arrangements including multiple deliverables. Significant inputs in the Company’s estimates of the selling price of separate units of accounting include market and pricing trends, pricing customization and practices, and profit objectives for the services.
Vehicle Pooling Costs
The Company defers in vehicle pooling costs certain yard operation expenses associated with vehicles consigned to and received by the Company, but not sold as of the end of the period. The Company quantifies the deferred costs using a calculation that includes the number of vehicles at its facilities at the beginning and end of the period, the number of vehicles sold during the period and an allocation of certain yard operation costs of the period. The primary expenses allocated and deferred are certain facility costs, labor, transportation, and vehicle processing. If the allocation factors change, then yard operation expenses could increase or decrease correspondingly in the future. These costs are expensed as vehicles are sold in subsequent periods on an average cost basis. Given the fixed cost nature of the Company’s business, there are no direct correlations for increases in expenses or units processed on vehicle pooling costs.
The Company applies the provisions of accounting guidance for subsequent measurement of inventory to its vehicle pooling costs. The provision requires that items such as idle facility expenses, double freight and rehandling costs be recognized as current period charges regardless of whether they meet the criteria of “abnormal” as provided in the guidance. In addition, the guidance requires that the allocation of fixed production overhead to the costs of conversion be based on the normal capacity of production facilities.
Foreign Currency Translation
The Company records foreign currency translation adjustments from the process of translating the functional currency of the financial statements of its foreign subsidiaries into the U.S. dollar reporting currency. The Canadian dollar, British pound, U.A.E. dirham, Bahraini dinar, Omani rial, Brazilian real, Indian rupee, Chinese renminbi and Euro are the functional currencies of the Company’s foreign subsidiaries as they are the primary currencies within the economic environment in which each subsidiary operates. The original equity investment in the respective subsidiaries is translated at historical rates. Assets and liabilities of the respective subsidiary’s operations are translated into U.S. dollars at period-end exchange rates, and revenues and expenses are translated into U.S. dollars at average exchange rates in effect during each reporting period. Adjustments resulting from the translation of each subsidiary’s financial statements are reported in other comprehensive income.
The cumulative effects of foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations were as follows (in thousands):

Cumulative loss on foreign currency translation as of July 31, 2015 |  | $ | (68,510 | )
Loss on foreign currency translation |  | (40,684 | )
Cumulative loss on foreign currency translation as of July 31, 2016 |  | $ | (109,194 | )
Loss on foreign currency translation |  | (18,775 | )
Cumulative loss on foreign currency translation as of October 31, 2016 |  | $ | (127,969 | )

Income Taxes and Deferred Tax Assets
Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the estimated future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities, their respective tax basis, and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. Excess tax benefits and deficiencies related to exercises of stock options are recognized as expense or benefit in the income statement as discrete items in the reporting period in which they occur.
8

In accordance with the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes, a two-step approach is applied to the recognition and measurement of uncertain tax positions taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. The first step is to determine if the weight of available evidence indicates that it is more likely than not that the tax position will be sustained in an audit, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes. The second step is to measure the tax benefit as the largest amount that is more than 50% likely to be realized upon ultimate settlement. The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in the provision for income taxes on its consolidated statements of income.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid investments purchased with original maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents include cash held in checking, domestic certificates of deposit, and money market accounts. The Company periodically invests its excess cash in money market funds and U.S. Treasury Bills. The Company’s cash and cash equivalents are placed with high credit quality financial institutions.
Marketable Securities
Marketable securities consist of marketable equity securities and are classified as available-for-sale and stated at fair value. The cost basis of the marketable securities is based on the specific identification method. Unrealized gains or losses relating to available-for-sale securities are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of income taxes. Reclassification adjustments out of accumulated other comprehensive income resulting from realized gains or losses from the sale of available-for-sale securities are included in other income.
Other Assets
Other assets consist of long-term deposits, contracted prepayments, notes receivable, and investments in unconsolidated affiliates. In accordance with ASC 323, Investments-Equity Method and Joint Ventures, the Company uses the equity method to account for investments in joint ventures and other unconsolidated entities if the Company has the ability to exercise significant influence over the financial and operating policies of those investees. Under the equity method, the Company records the initial investment in an entity at cost and subsequently adjusts the investment for the Company’s share of the affiliate’s undistributed earnings (losses) and distributions recorded in other income. The Company reviews the carrying amount of the investments in unconsolidated affiliates annually, or whenever circumstances indicate that the value of these investments may have declined. If the Company determines an investment is impaired on an other-than-temporary basis, a loss equal to the difference between the fair value of the investment and its carrying amount is recorded.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Company records its financial assets and liabilities at fair value in accordance with the framework for measuring fair value in U.S. GAAP. In accordance with ASC 820, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures, as amended by Accounting Standards Update 2011-04, the Company considers fair value as an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants under current market conditions. This framework establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs used to measure fair value:

Level I | Observable inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities traded in active markets.

Level II | Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level I that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly.

Level III | Inputs that are generally unobservable. These inputs may be used with internally developed methodologies that result in management’s best estimate.

The amounts recorded for financial instruments in the Company’s consolidated financial statements, which included cash, accounts receivable, accounts payable, accrued liabilities and Revolving Loan Facility approximated their fair values as of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016, due to the short-term nature of those instruments, and are classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy. Cash equivalents are classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices of the underlying investments. See Note 2 – Long-Term Debt, and Note 4 – Fair Value Measures.
Capitalized Software Costs
The Company capitalizes system development costs and website development costs related to enterprise computing services during the application development stage. Costs related to preliminary project activities and post implementation activities are expensed as incurred. Internal-use software is amortized on a straight-line basis over its estimated useful life, generally three years. The Company evaluates the useful lives of these assets on an annual basis and tests for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances occur that impact the recoverability of these assets.
9

Total gross capitalized software as of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016 was $51.5 million and $49.4 million, respectively. Accumulated amortization expense related to software as of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016 totaled $25.1 million and $20.9 million, respectively.
Acquisitions
The Company recognizes and measures identifiable assets acquired and liabilities assumed in acquired entities in accordance with ASC 805, Business Combinations. The accounting for acquisitions involves significant judgments and estimates, including the fair value of certain forms of consideration, the fair value of acquired intangible assets, which involve projections of future revenues, cash flows and terminal value, which are then either discounted at an estimated discount rate or measured at an estimated royalty rate, and the fair value of other acquired assets and assumed liabilities, including potential contingencies and the useful lives of the assets. The projections are developed using internal forecasts, available industry and market data and estimates of long-term growth rates of the Company. Historical experience is additionally utilized, in which historical or current costs have approximated fair value for certain assets acquired.
Segments and Other Geographic Reporting
The Company’s U.S. and International regions are considered two separate operating segments and are disclosed as two reportable segments. The segments represent geographic areas and reflect how the chief operating decision maker allocates resources and measures results, including total revenues, operating income and income before income taxes. The segments continue to share similar business models, services and economic characteristics although recent changes in management structure as of July 31, 2016 and continued growth in the Company’s International region have resulted in the change in the reportable segments. Prior period reportable segment information has been adjusted to reflect the change in reportable segments.
NOTE 2 – Long-Term Debt
Credit Agreement
On December 3, 2014, the Company entered into a Credit Agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent, and Bank of America, N.A., as syndication agent. The Credit Agreement provided for (a) a secured revolving loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of up to $300.0 million (Revolving Loan Facility), and (b) a secured term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million (Term Loan), which was fully drawn at closing. The Term Loan amortized $18.8 million per quarter.
On March 15, 2016, the Company entered into a First Amendment to Credit Agreement (the “Amendment to Credit Agreement”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent and Bank of America, N.A. The Amendment to Credit Agreement amends certain terms of the Credit Agreement, dated as of December 3, 2014. The Amendment to Credit Agreement provides for (a) an increase in the secured revolving credit commitments by $50.0 million, bringing the aggregate principal amount of the revolving credit commitments under the Credit Agreement to $350.0 million, (b) a new secured term loan (Incremental Term Loan) in the aggregate principal amount of $93.8 million having a maturity date of March 15, 2021, and (c) an extension of the termination date of the Revolving Loan Facility and the maturity date of the Term Loan from December 3, 2019 to March 15, 2021. The Amendment to Credit Agreement extended the amortization period for the Term Loan, and decreased the quarterly amortization payments for that loan to $7.5 million per quarter. The Amendment to Credit Agreement additionally reduced the pricing levels under the Credit Agreement to a range of 0.15% to 0.30% in the case of the commitment fee, 1.125% to 2.0% in the case of the applicable margin for LIBOR loans, and 0.125% to 1.0% in the case of the applicable margin for base rate loans, based on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter. The Company borrowed the entire $93.8 million principal amount of the Incremental Term Loan concurrent with the closing of the Amendment to Credit Agreement.
On July 21, 2016, the Company entered into a Second Amendment to Credit Agreement (the “Second Amendment to Credit Agreement”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, SunTrust Bank, and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent (as successor in interest to Wells Fargo Bank). The Second Amendment to Credit Agreement amends certain terms of the Credit Agreement, dated as of December 3, 2014. The Second Amendment to Credit Agreement provides for, among other things, (a) an increase in the secured revolving credit commitments by $500.0 million, bringing the aggregate principal amount of the revolving credit commitments under the Credit Agreement to $850.0 million, (b) the repayment of existing term loans outstanding under the Credit Agreement, (c) an extension of the termination date of the revolving credit facility under the Credit Agreement from March 15, 2021 to July 21, 2021, and (d) increased covenant flexibility.
10

Concurrent with the closing of the Second Amendment to Credit Agreement, the Company prepaid in full the outstanding $242.5 million principal amount of the Term Loan and Incremental Term Loan under the Credit Agreement without premium or penalty. The Second Amendment to Credit Agreement reduced the pricing levels under the Credit Agreement to a range of 0.125% to 0.20% in the case of the commitment fee, 1.00% to 1.75% in the case of the applicable margin for LIBOR loans, and 0.0% to 0.75% in the case of the applicable margin for base rate loans, in each case depending on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio. The principal purposes of these financing transactions were to increase the size and availability under the Company’s Revolving Loan Facility and to provide additional long-term financing. The proceeds are being used for general corporate purposes, including working capital and capital expenditures, potential share repurchases, acquisitions, or other investments relating to the Company’s expansion strategies in domestic and international markets.
The Revolving Loan Facility under the Credit Agreement bears interest, at the election of the Company, at either (a) the Base Rate, which is defined as a fluctuating rate per annum equal to the greatest of (i) the Prime Rate in effect on such day; (ii) the Federal Funds Rate in effect on such date plus 0.50%; or (iii) an adjusted LIBOR rate determined on the basis of a one-month interest period plus 1.0%, in each case plus an applicable margin ranging from 0.0% to 0.75% based on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter; or (b) an adjusted LIBOR rate plus an applicable margin ranging from 1.00% to 1.75% depending on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter. Interest is due and payable quarterly, in arrears, for loans bearing interest at the Base Rate, and at the end of an interest period (or at each three month interval in the case of loans with interest periods greater than three months) in the case of loans bearing interest at the adjusted LIBOR rate. The interest rate as of October 31, 2016 on the Company’s Revolving Loan Facility was the one month LIBOR rate of 0.53% plus an applicable margin of 1.25%. The carrying amount of the Credit Agreement is comprised of borrowings under which interest accrues under a fluctuating interest rate structure. Accordingly, the carrying value approximates fair value at October 31, 2016, and was classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy.
Amounts borrowed under the Revolving Loan Facility may be repaid and reborrowed until the maturity date of July 21, 2021. The Company is obligated to pay a commitment fee on the unused portion of the Revolving Loan Facility. The commitment fee rate ranges from 0.125% to 0.20%, depending on the Company’s consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter, on the average daily unused portion of the revolving credit commitment under the Credit Agreement. The Company had $341.9 million and $238.0 million of outstanding borrowings under the Revolving Loan Facility as of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016, respectively.
The Company’s obligations under the Credit Agreement are guaranteed by certain of the Company’s domestic subsidiaries meeting materiality thresholds set forth in the Credit Agreement. Such obligations, including the guaranties, are secured by substantially all of the assets of the Company and the assets of the subsidiary guarantors pursuant to a Security Agreement, dated December 3, 2014, among the Company, the subsidiary guarantors from time to time party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as collateral agent.
The Credit Agreement contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants that limit or restrict the Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends, or make distributions on and repurchase stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. The Company is also required to maintain compliance, measured at the end of each fiscal quarter, with a consolidated total net leverage ratio and a consolidated interest coverage ratio. The Company was in compliance with all covenants related to the Credit Agreement as of October 31, 2016.
Note Purchase Agreement
On December 3, 2014, the Company entered into a Note Purchase Agreement and sold to certain purchasers (collectively, the Purchasers) $400.0 million in aggregate principal amount of senior secured notes (Senior Notes) consisting of (i) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.07% Senior Notes, Series A, due December 3, 2024; (ii) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.19% Senior Notes, Series B, due December 3, 2026; (iii) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Senior Notes, Series C, due December 3, 2027; and (iv) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.35% Senior Notes, Series D, due December 3, 2029. Interest is due and payable quarterly, in arrears, on each of the Senior Notes. Proceeds from the Note Purchase Agreement are being used for general corporate purposes.
On July 21, 2016, the Company entered into Amendment No. 1 to Note Purchase Agreement (the First Amendment to Note Purchase Agreement) which amended certain terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, including providing for increased flexibility substantially consistent with the changes included in the Second Amendment to Credit Agreement, including among other things increased covenant flexibility.
The Company may prepay the Senior Notes, in whole or in part, at any time, subject to certain conditions, including minimum amounts and payment of a make-whole amount equal to the discounted value of the remaining scheduled interest payments under the Senior Notes.
11

The Company’s obligations under the Note Purchase Agreement are guaranteed by certain of the Company’s domestic subsidiaries meeting materiality thresholds set forth in the Note Purchase Agreement. Such obligations, including the guaranties, are secured by substantially all of the assets of the Company and the subsidiary guarantors. The obligations of the Company and its subsidiary guarantors under the Note Purchase Agreement will be treated on a pari passu basis with the obligations of those entities under the Credit Agreement as well as any additional debt the Company may obtain.
The Note Purchase Agreement contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants that limit or restrict the Company and its subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends, or make distributions and repurchase stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. The Company is also required to maintain compliance, measured at the end of each fiscal quarter, with a consolidated total net leverage ratio and a consolidated interest coverage ratio. The Company was in compliance with all covenants related to the Note Purchase Agreement as of October 31, 2016.
Related to the execution of the Credit Agreement, First Amendment to Credit Agreement, Second Amendment to Credit Agreement, and the Note Purchase Agreement, the Company incurred $3.4 million in costs, of which $2.0 million was capitalized as debt issuance fees and $1.4 million was recorded as a reduction of the long-term debt proceeds as a debt discount. Both the debt issuance fees and debt discount are amortized to interest expense over the term of the respective debt instruments and are classified as reductions of the outstanding liability.
NOTE 3 – Goodwill and Intangible Assets
The following table sets forth amortizable intangible assets by major asset class:

(In thousands) |  | October 31, 2016 |  | July 31, 2016
Amortized intangibles: |  |  |  |
Covenants not to compete |  | $ | 1,705 |  |  | $ | 1,702 |
Supply contracts & customer relationships |  | 25,885 |  |  | 26,471 |
Trade name |  | 5,126 |  |  | 5,163 |
Licenses and databases |  | 2,472 |  |  | 2,488 |
Accumulated amortization |  | (24,947 | ) |  | (24,063 | )
Net intangibles |  | $ | 10,241 |  |  | $ | 11,761 |

Aggregate amortization expense on amortizable intangible assets was $1.3 million and $1.5 million for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The change in the carrying amount of goodwill was as follows (in thousands):

Balance as of July 31, 2016 |  | $ | 260,198 |
Effect of foreign currency exchange rates |  | (5,105 | )
Balance as of October 31, 2016 |  | $ | 255,093 |

12

NOTE 4 – Fair Value Measures
The following table summarizes the fair value of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities measured and recorded at fair value on a recurring basis based on inputs used to derive their fair values:

|  | October 31, 2016 |  | July 31, 2016
(In thousands) |  | Fair Value Total |  | Significant Observable Inputs (Level II) |  | Fair Value Total |  | Significant Observable Inputs (Level II)
Assets |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Cash equivalents |  | $ | 9,743 |  |  | $ | 9,743 |  |  | $ | 8,422 |  |  | $ | 8,422 |
Total Assets |  | $ | 9,743 |  |  | $ | 9,743 |  |  | $ | 8,422 |  |  | $ | 8,422 |
Liabilities |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
Long-term fixed rate debt, including current portion |  | $ | 415,757 |  |  | $ | 415,757 |  |  | $ | 430,375 |  |  | $ | 430,375 |
Revolving loan facility |  | 341,900 |  |  | 341,900 |  |  | 238,000 |  |  | 238,000 |
Total Liabilities |  | $ | 757,657 |  |  | $ | 757,657 |  |  | $ | 668,375 |  |  | $ | 668,375 |

During the three months ended October 31, 2016, no transfers were made between any levels within the fair value hierarchy. See Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies, and Note 2 – Long-Term Debt.
NOTE 5 – Net Income Per Share
The table below reconciles basic weighted average shares outstanding to diluted weighted average shares outstanding:

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015
Weighted average common shares outstanding |  | 112,718 |  |  | 120,155 |
Effect of dilutive securities - stock options |  | 6,161 |  |  | 6,989 |
Weighted average common and dilutive potential common shares outstanding |  | 118,879 |  |  | 127,144 |

There were no material adjustments to net income required in calculating diluted net income per share. Excluded from the dilutive earnings per share calculation were 198,561 and 7,710,218 shares underlying outstanding stock options for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, because their inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.
NOTE 6 – Stock-based Payment Compensation
The Company recognizes compensation expense for stock option awards on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award. The following is a summary of activity for the Company’s stock options for the three months ended October 31, 2016:

(In thousands, except per share and term data) |  | Shares |  | Weighted Average Exercise Price |  | Weighted Average Remaining Contractual Term (In years) |  | Aggregate Intrinsic Value
Outstanding as of July 31, 2016 |  | 19,451 |  |  | $ | 24.30 |  |  | 4.96 |  | $ | 508,401 |
Grants of options |  | 188 |  |  | 53.97 |  |  |  |  |
Exercises |  | (9,689 | ) |  | 15.74 |  |  |  |  |
Forfeitures or expirations |  | (24 | ) |  | 35.13 |  |  |  |  |
Outstanding as of October 31, 2016 |  | 9,926 |  |  | $ | 33.19 |  |  | 7.07 |  | $ | 191,624 |
Exercisable as of October 31, 2016 |  | 5,322 |  |  | $ | 30.09 |  |  | 6.26 |  | $ | 119,110 |

13

The aggregate intrinsic value is calculated as the difference between the exercise price of the underlying awards and the quoted price of the Company’s common stock. The number of options that were in-the-money was 9,738,305 at October 31, 2016.
The table below sets forth the stock-based payment compensation recognized by the Company:

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015
General and administrative |  | $ | 4,284 |  |  | $ | 4,728 |
Yard operations |  | 801 |  |  | 686 |
Total stock-based payment compensation |  | $ | 5,085 |  |  | $ | 5,414 |

In accordance with ASC 718, Compensation – Stock Compensation, the Company made an estimate of expected forfeitures and recognized compensation cost only for those equity awards expected to vest.
In October 2013, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors, subject to stockholder approval (which was subsequently obtained at the December 16, 2013 annual meeting of stockholders), approved the grant to each of A. Jayson Adair, the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, and Vincent W. Mitz, the Company’s President, of nonqualified stock options to purchase 2,000,000 and 1,500,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, respectively, at an exercise price of $35.62 per share, which equaled the closing price of the Company’s common stock on December 16, 2013, the effective date of grant. Such grants were made in lieu of any cash salary or bonus compensation in excess of $1.00 per year or the grant of any additional equity incentives for a five-year period. Each option will become exercisable over five years, subject to continued service by Mr. Adair and Mr. Mitz, with 20% vesting on April 15, 2015 and December 16, 2014, respectively, and the balance vesting monthly over the subsequent four years. Each option will become fully vested, assuming continued service on April 15, 2019 and December 16, 2018, respectively. If, upon or following a change in control, either the Company or a successor entity terminates the executive’s service without cause, or the executive resigns for good reason (as defined in the option agreement), then 100% of the shares subject to his stock option will immediately vest. On June 2, 2015, the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors approved the amendment of each of the stand-alone stock option agreements, by and between the Company and A. Jayson Adair and Vincent W. Mitz, respectively, to remove the provision providing at times prior to a “change in control” for the immediate vesting in full of the underlying option upon an involuntary termination of Mr. Adair or Mr. Mitz, as applicable, without “cause.” The fair value of each option at the date of grant was $11.43. The total estimated compensation expense to be recognized by the Company over the five year estimated service period for these options is $40.0 million. The Company recognized $1.9 million in compensation expenses for these grants in the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015.
NOTE 7 – Stock Repurchases
On September 22, 2011, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a 40 million share increase in the stock repurchase program, bringing the total current authorization to 98 million shares. The repurchases may be effected through solicited or unsolicited transactions in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. No time limit has been placed on the duration of the stock repurchase program. Subject to applicable securities laws, such repurchases will be made at such times and in such amounts as the Company deems appropriate and may be discontinued at any time. The Company did not repurchase any shares of its common stock under the program during the three months ended October 31, 2016 or 2015. As of October 31, 2016, the total number of shares repurchased under the program was 53,456,801, and 44,543,199 shares were available for repurchase under the program.
On July 9, 2015, the Company completed a modified “Dutch Auction” tender offer, or tender offer, to purchase up to 13,888,888 shares of its common stock at a price not greater than $36.00 nor less than $34.75 per share. In connection with the tender offer, the Company accepted for payment an aggregate of 6,254,061 shares of its common stock at a purchase price of $36.00 per share for a total value of $225.1 million. Additionally, on December 30, 2015, the Company completed a modified “Dutch Auction” tender offer, or tender offer, to purchase up to 7,317,073 shares of its common stock at a price not greater than $41.00 nor less than $38.00 per share. In connection with the tender offer, the Company accepted for payment an aggregate of 8,333,333 shares of its common stock at a purchase price of $39.00 per share for a total value of $325.0 million. The Company’s directors and executive officers did not participate in the tender offers. The shares repurchased as a result of the tender offers were not part of the Company’s stock repurchase program.
In fiscal 2017 and 2016, certain executive officers and employees exercised stock options through cashless exercises. A portion of the options exercised were net settled in satisfaction of the exercise price and federal and state minimum statutory tax withholding requirements. The Company remitted $134.6 million for the three months ended October 31, 2016 to the proper taxing authorities in satisfaction of the employees’ minimum statutory withholding requirements.
14

The exercised stock options, utilizing a cashless exercise, are summarized in the following table:

Period |  | Options Exercised |  | Weighted Average Exercise Price |  | Shares Net Settled for Exercise |  | Shares Withheld for Taxes(1) |  | Net Shares to Employees |  | Weighted Average Share Price for Withholding |  | Tax Withholding (in 000s)
FY 2016—Q4 |  | 1,130,000 |  |  | $ | 18.64 |  |  | 410,648 |  |  | 293,152 |  |  | 426,200 |  |  | $ | 51.30 |  |  | $ | 15,039 |
FY 2017—Q1 |  | 9,000,000 |  |  | 15.39 |  |  | 2,704,486 |  |  | 2,627,661 |  |  | 3,667,853 |  |  | 51.23 |  |  | 134,615 |

(1) | Shares withheld for taxes are treated as a repurchase of shares for accounting purposes but do not count against the Company’s stock repurchase program.

NOTE 8 – Income Taxes
The Company applies the provisions of the accounting standard for uncertain tax positions to its income taxes. For benefits to be realized, a tax position must be more likely than not to be sustained upon examination. The amount recognized is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement.
The Company’s effective income tax rates were (63.1)% and 35.7% for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The decrease in the overall tax rate was the result of recognizing excess tax benefits from the exercise of employee stock options of $101.4 million for the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to $0.2 million for the three months ended October 31, 2015.
As of October 31, 2016, the gross amounts of the Company’s liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits of $26.9 million, including interest and penalties, were classified as long-term income taxes payable in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Over the next twelve months, the Company’s existing positions will continue to generate an increase in liabilities for unrecognized tax benefits, as well as a likely decrease in liabilities as a result of the lapse of the applicable statute of limitations and the conclusion of income tax audits. The expected decrease in liabilities relating to unrecognized tax benefits will have a positive effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position when realized. The Company recognizes interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions in income tax expense.
The Company files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, various states and foreign jurisdictions. The Company is currently under examination by certain taxing authorities in the U.S. for fiscal years between 2011 and 2015. At this time, the Company does not believe that the outcome of any examination will have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.
The Company has not provided for U.S. federal income and foreign withholding taxes on its foreign subsidiaries’ undistributed earnings as of October 31, 2016 because the Company intends to reinvest such earnings indefinitely in its foreign operations. Specifically, the earnings will be dedicated to the following areas outside the U.S. (i) funding operating and capital spending needs in existing foreign markets; (ii) funding merger and acquisition deals both in existing and new foreign markets; and (iii) other investments to help expand the Company’s footprint in foreign emerging markets. The Company does not anticipate the need for any foreign cash in the U.S. operations. It is not practical to determine the taxes that might be incurred if these earnings were to be distributed in the form of dividends or otherwise. If distributed, however, foreign tax credits may become available under current law to reduce or eliminate the resultant U.S. income tax liability.
NOTE 9 – Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Pending
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which supersedes all existing guidance on accounting for leases in ASC Topic 840. This ASU is intended to provide enhanced transparency and comparability by requiring lessees to record right-of-use assets and corresponding lease liabilities on the balance sheet. This ASU will continue to classify leases as either finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern of expense recognition in the statement of income. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018 and adoption is to be applied with a modified retrospective approach to each prior reporting period presented with various optional practical expedients; however early adoption is permitted. Based on a preliminary assessment, the Company expects that most of its operating lease commitments will be subject to the new guidance and recognized as operating lease liabilities and right-of-use assets upon adoption, resulting in a significant increase in the assets and liabilities on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The Company is continuing its assessment, which may identify additional impacts the ASU may have on the Company’s consolidated results of operations, financial position, and related disclosures.
In November 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-17, Balance Sheet Classification of Deferred Taxes, which requires companies to classify all deferred tax assets and liabilities as non-current on the balance sheet, rather than separating deferred taxes into current and non-current amounts. This ASU is effective for annual and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 and can be adopted prospectively or retrospectively; however, early adoption is permitted. The Company’s adoption of ASU 2015-17 will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.
15

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), which supersedes the revenue recognition requirements in ASC 605, Revenue Recognition. ASU 2014-09 is based on the principle that revenue is recognized to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 also requires additional disclosure about the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from customer contracts, including significant judgments and changes in judgments and assets recognized from costs incurred to obtain or fulfill a contract. ASU 2014-09 is effective for annual and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017. ASU 2014-09 allows adoption with either retrospective application to each period presented, or retrospective application with the cumulative effect recognized as of the date of initial application. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of implementing ASU 2014-09 on the consolidated financial statements, as well as evaluating the adoption date and transition alternatives.
Adopted
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting, which simplifies several aspects of the accounting for share-based payments, including income tax consequences and classification on the statement of cash flows. Under the new standard, all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies are recognized as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement as discrete items in the reporting period in which they occur. Additionally, excess tax benefits are classified as an operating activity on the consolidated statements of cash flows. The Company early adopted ASU 2016-09 during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2016 on a modified retrospective basis.
In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810), which is intended to improve targeted areas of consolidation guidance for legal entities such as limited partnerships, limited liability corporations, and securitization structures (collateralized debt obligations, collateralized loan obligations, and mortgage-backed security transactions). The ASU focuses on the consolidation evaluation for reporting organizations that are required to evaluate whether they should consolidate certain legal entities. In addition to reducing the number of consolidation models from four to two, the new standard simplifies the FASB Accounting Standards Codification and improves current U.S. GAAP by placing more emphasis on risk of loss when determining a controlling financial interest, reducing the frequency of the application of related-party guidance when determining a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity (VIE), and changing consolidation conclusions for companies in several industries that typically make use of limited partnerships or VIEs. The ASU will be effective for annual and interim periods within those annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The Company’s adoption of ASU 2015-02 did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.
NOTE 10 – Legal Proceedings
The Company is subject to threats of litigation and is involved in actual litigation and damage claims arising in the ordinary course of business, such as actions related to injuries, property damage, contract disputes, and handling or disposal of vehicles. The material pending legal proceedings to which the Company is a party, or of which any of the Company’s property is subject, include the following matters.
On November 1, 2013, the Company filed suit against Sparta Consulting, Inc. (now known as KPIT) in the 44th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas, alleging fraud, fraudulent inducement, and/or promissory fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unfair business practices pursuant to California Business and Professions Code § 17200, breach of contract, declaratory judgment, and attorney’s fees. The Company seeks compensatory and exemplary damages, disgorgement of amounts paid, attorney’s fees, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs of suit, and a judicial declaration of the parties’ rights, duties, and obligations under the Implementation Services Agreement dated October 6, 2011. The suit arises out of the Company’s September 17, 2013 decision to terminate the Implementation Services Agreement, under which KPIT was to design, implement, and deliver a customized replacement enterprise resource planning system for the Company. On January 2, 2014, KPIT removed this suit to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On August 11, 2014, the Northern District of Texas transferred the suit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California for convenience. On January 8, 2014, KPIT filed suit against the Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, alleging breach of contract, promissory estoppel, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, account stated, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, and declaratory relief. KPIT seeks compensatory and exemplary damages, prejudgment interest, costs of suit, and a judicial declaration of the parties’ rights, duties, and obligations under the Implementation Services Agreement. On June 8, 2016, the Company amended its complaint to include claims that KPIT stole certain intellectual property owned by the Company and acted negligently in its provision of services. The Company is pursuing its claim for damages, and defending against KPIT’s claim for damages.
16

The Company provides for costs relating to these matters when a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The effect of the outcome of these matters on the Company’s future consolidated results of operations and cash flows cannot be predicted because any such effect depends on future results of operations and the amount and timing of the resolution of such matters. The Company believes that any ultimate liability will not have a material effect on its consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows. However, the amount of the liabilities associated with these claims, if any, cannot be determined with certainty. The Company maintains insurance which may or may not provide coverage for claims made against the Company. There is no assurance that there will be insurance coverage available when and if needed. Additionally, the insurance that the Company carries requires that the Company pay for costs and/or claims exposure up to the amount of the insurance deductibles negotiated when the insurance is purchased.
Governmental Proceedings
The Georgia Department of Revenue, or DOR, has conducted a sales and use tax audit of the Company’s operations in Georgia for the period from January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2011. As a result of their initial audit, the DOR issued a notice of proposed assessment for uncollected sales taxes in which it asserted that the Company failed to collect and remit sales taxes totaling $73.8 million, including penalties and interest. According to the DOR, the proposed assessment was based on its initial determination that the Company’s sales did not constitute nontaxable sales for resale.
The Company subsequently engaged a Georgia law firm and outside tax advisors to review the conduct of its business operations in Georgia, the notice of proposed assessment, and the DOR’s policy position. In particular, the Company’s outside legal counsel provided the Company an opinion that the sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax. In rendering its opinion, the Company’s counsel noted that non-U.S. registered resellers are unable to comply strictly with technical requirements for a Georgia certificate of exemption but concluded that its sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax notwithstanding this technical inability to comply.
Since the Company’s receipt of the notice of proposed assessment, the Company and its counsel have engaged in active discussions with the DOR to resolve the matter. On June 5, 2015, following the Company’s discussions and after additional review of documentation, the DOR provided the Company with revised audit work papers computing a sales tax liability of $2.7 million before interest and any penalties.
On June 22, 2015, representatives of the DOR and the Office of the Attorney General for the State of Georgia informed the Company’s counsel that the DOR intended to issue a formal notice of assessment for an estimated $100.0 million, based on the DOR’s original proposed assessment of $73.8 million plus additional accumulated interest and penalties. On August 4, 2015, the DOR issued an official Assessment and Demand for Payment for $96.1 million for sales taxes, penalties, and interest that the DOR alleges the Company owes the State of Georgia. The Company filed an appeal of this notice of assessment from the DOR with the Georgia Tax Tribunal on September 3, 2015. On August 5, 2016, the DOR filed a response in which it denied all allegations noted in the Company’s appeal of the notice of assessment. The Company continues to substantiate its position that these transactions are nontaxable sales for resale by providing the DOR with documentation supporting the exempt nature of these sales.
Based on the opinion from the Company’s outside law firm, advice from its outside tax advisors, and the Company’s best estimate of a probable outcome, the Company has adequately provided for the payment of any assessment in its consolidated financial statements. The Company believes it has strong defenses to the DOR’s notice of assessment and intends to defend this matter. There can be no assurance that this matter will be resolved in the Company’s favor or that the Company will not ultimately be required to make a substantial payment to the Georgia DOR. The Company understands that litigating and defending the matter in Georgia could be expensive and time-consuming and result in substantial management distraction. If the matter were to be resolved in a manner adverse to the Company, it could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial position.
NOTE 11 – Segments and Other Geographic Reporting
The Company’s U.S. and International regions are considered two separate operating segments and are disclosed as two reportable segments. The segments represent geographic areas and reflect how the chief operating decision maker allocates resources and measures results, including total revenues, operating income and income before income taxes. The segments continue to share similar business models, services and economic characteristics although recent changes in management structure as of July 31, 2016 and continued growth in the Company’s International region have resulted in the change in the reportable segments. Prior period reportable segment information has been adjusted to reflect the change in the Company’s reportable segments. Intercompany income (expense) is primarily related to charges for services provided by the U.S. segment.
17

The following tables present financial information by segment:

|  | Three Months Ended October 31, 2016
(In thousands) |  | United States |  | International |  | Total
Total service revenues and vehicle sales |  | $ | 285,062 |  |  | $ | 60,929 |  |  | $ | 345,991 |
Yard operations |  | 146,353 |  |  | 21,258 |  |  | 167,611 |
Cost of vehicle sales |  | 14,249 |  |  | 18,838 |  |  | 33,087 |
General and administrative |  | 35,478 |  |  | 4,991 |  |  | 40,469 |
Operating income |  | 88,982 |  |  | 15,842 |  |  | 104,824 |
Interest (expense) income, net |  | (5,861 | ) |  | 239 |  |  | (5,622 | )
Other income, net |  | (245 | ) |  | 3,577 |  |  | 3,332 |
Intercompany income (expense) |  | 2,708 |  |  | (2,708 | ) |  | — |
Income before income taxes |  | 85,584 |  |  | 16,950 |  |  | 102,534 |
Income tax (benefit) expense |  | (68,303 | ) |  | 3,557 |  |  | (64,746 | )
Net income |  | $ | 153,887 |  |  | $ | 13,393 |  |  | $ | 167,280 |
Depreciation and amortization |  | $ | 12,386 |  |  | $ | 2,323 |  |  | $ | 14,709 |
Capital expenditures |  | 36,521 |  |  | 1,688 |  |  | 38,209 |
Total assets |  | 1,375,198 |  |  | 395,198 |  |  | 1,770,396 |
Goodwill |  | 179,906 |  |  | 75,187 |  |  | 255,093 |

|  | Three Months Ended October 31, 2015
(In thousands) |  | United States |  | International |  | Total
Total service revenues and vehicle sales |  | $ | 230,465 |  |  | $ | 58,373 |  |  | $ | 288,838 |
Yard operations |  | 115,118 |  |  | 20,791 |  |  | 135,909 |
Cost of vehicle sales |  | 12,726 |  |  | 19,342 |  |  | 32,068 |
General and administrative |  | 29,682 |  |  | 4,933 |  |  | 34,615 |
Operating income |  | 72,939 |  |  | 13,307 |  |  | 86,246 |
Interest (expense) income, net |  | (5,596 | ) |  | 83 |  |  | (5,513 | )
Other income, net |  | 301 |  |  | 726 |  |  | 1,027 |
Intercompany income (expense) |  | 2,799 |  |  | (2,799 | ) |  | — |
Income before income taxes |  | 70,443 |  |  | 11,317 |  |  | 81,760 |
Income taxes |  | 26,811 |  |  | 2,339 |  |  | 29,150 |
Net income |  | $ | 43,632 |  |  | $ | 8,978 |  |  | $ | 52,610 |
Depreciation and amortization |  | $ | 9,049 |  |  | $ | 2,472 |  |  | $ | 11,521 |
Capital expenditures |  | 19,321 |  |  | 846 |  |  | 20,167 |

18

ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, including the information incorporated by reference herein, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the Securities Act), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). All statements other than statements of historical facts are statements that could be deemed forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “intend,” “forecast,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. The forward-looking statements contained in this Form 10-Q involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and situations that may cause our or our industry’s actual results, level of activity, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these statements. These forward-looking statements are made in reliance upon the safe harbor provision of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These factors include those listed in Part I, Item 1A. under the caption entitled “Risk Factors” in this Form 10-Q and those discussed elsewhere in this Form 10-Q. Unless the context otherwise requires, references in this Form 10-Q to “Copart,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” or “our” refer to Copart, Inc. We encourage investors to review these factors carefully together with the other matters referred to herein, as well as in the other documents we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC). We may from time to time make additional written and oral forward-looking statements, including statements contained in our filings with the SEC. We do not undertake to update any forward-looking statement that may be made from time to time by or on behalf of us.
Although we believe that, based on information currently available to us and our management, the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.
Overview
We are a leading provider of online auctions and vehicle remarketing services in the United States (U.S.), Canada, the United Kingdom (U.K.), Brazil, the United Arab Emirates (U.A.E.), Oman, Bahrain, Germany, Ireland, Spain and India.
We provide vehicle sellers with a full range of services to process and sell vehicles primarily over the Internet through our Virtual Bidding Third Generation Internet auction-style sales technology, which we refer to as VB3. Vehicle sellers consist primarily of insurance companies, but also include banks and financial institutions, charities, car dealerships, fleet operators and vehicle rental companies. We sell the vehicles principally to licensed vehicle dismantlers, rebuilders, repair licensees, used vehicle dealers and exporters and, at certain locations, to the general public. The majority of the vehicles sold on behalf of insurance companies are either damaged vehicles deemed a total loss or not economically repairable by the insurance companies, or are recovered stolen vehicles for which an insurance settlement with the vehicle owner has already been made. We offer vehicle sellers a full range of services that expedite each stage of the vehicle sales process, minimize administrative and processing costs, and maximize the ultimate sales price.
In the U.S., Canada, Brazil, the U.A.E., Oman, Bahrain, Germany, Ireland, Spain and India, we sell vehicles primarily as an agent and derive revenue primarily from fees paid by vehicle sellers and vehicle buyers as well as related fees for services, such as towing and storage. In the U.K., we operate both on a principal basis, purchasing the salvage vehicles outright from the insurance companies and reselling the vehicles for our own account, and as an agent. In Germany and Spain, we also derive revenue from sales listing fees for listing vehicles on behalf of many insurance companies.
We monitor and analyze a number of key financial performance indicators in order to manage our business and evaluate our financial and operating performance. Such indicators include:
Service and Vehicle Sales Revenue: Our revenue consists of sales transaction fees charged to vehicle sellers and vehicle buyers, transportation revenue, purchased vehicle revenue, and other remarketing services. Revenues from sellers are generally generated either on a fixed fee contract basis, where our fees are fixed based on the sale of each vehicle regardless of the selling price of the vehicle or under our Percentage Incentive Program (PIP), where our fees are generally based on a predetermined percentage of the vehicle sales price. Under the consignment or fixed fee program, we generally charge an additional fee for title processing and special preparation. We may also charge additional fees for the cost of transporting the vehicle to our facility, storage of the vehicle, and other incidental costs not included in the consignment fee. Under the consignment program, only the fees associated with vehicle processing are recorded in revenue, not the actual sales price (gross proceeds). Sales transaction fees also include fees charged to vehicle buyers for purchasing vehicles, storage, loading, and annual registration. Transportation revenue includes charges to sellers for towing vehicles under certain contracts and towing charges assessed to buyers for delivering vehicles. Purchased vehicle revenue includes the gross sales price of the vehicle, which we have purchased or are otherwise considered to own and is primarily generated in the U.K. We have certain contracts with insurance companies in which we act as a principal, purchasing vehicles and reselling them for our own account. We also purchase vehicles in the open market, primarily from individuals, and resell them for our own account.
19

Our revenue is impacted by several factors, including total loss frequency and the average vehicle auction selling price, as a significant amount of our service revenue is associated in some manner to the ultimate selling price of the vehicle. Vehicle auction selling prices are driven primarily by: (i) changes in commodity prices, particularly the per ton price for crushed car bodies, as we believe this has an impact on the ultimate selling price of vehicles sold for scrap and vehicles sold for dismantling; (ii) used car pricing, which we believe has an impact on total loss frequency; (iii) the mix of cars sold; and (iv) changes in the U.S. dollar exchange rate to foreign currencies, which we believe has an impact on auction participation by international buyers. We cannot specifically quantify the financial impact that commodity pricing, used car pricing, and product sales mix has on the selling price of vehicles, our service revenues or financial results. Total loss frequency is the percentage of cars involved in accidents which insurance companies salvage rather than repair and is driven by the relationship between repairs costs, used car values, and auction returns. Over the last several years, we believe there has been an increase in overall growth in the salvage market driven by an increase in total loss frequency. The increase in total loss frequency may have been driven by the decline in used car values relative to repair costs, which we believe are generally trending upward. Conversely, increases in used car prices, such as occurred during the most recent recession, may decrease total loss frequency and adversely affect our growth rate. Used car values are determined by many factors, including used car supply, which is tied directly to new car sales, and the average age of cars on the road. New car sales grew on a year over year basis, increasing the supply of used cars. Additionally, the average age of cars on the road continued to increase, growing from 9.6 years in 2002 to 11.5 years in 2015. The factors that influence repair costs, used car pricing, and auction returns are many and varied and we cannot predict their movements. Accordingly, we cannot predict future trends in total loss frequency.
Operating Costs and Expenses: Yard operations expenses consist primarily of operating personnel (which includes yard management, clerical and yard employees), rent, contract vehicle towing, insurance, fuel, equipment maintenance and repair, and costs of vehicles sold under the purchase contracts. General and administrative expenses consist primarily of executive management, accounting, data processing, sales personnel, human resources, professional fees, research and development, and marketing expenses.
Other Income and Expense: Other income primarily includes income from the rental of certain real property, foreign exchange rate gains and losses, and gains and losses from the disposal of assets, which will fluctuate based on the nature of these activities each period. Other expense consists primarily of interest expense on long-term debt. See Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 2 – Long-Term Debt.
Liquidity and Cash Flows: Our primary source of working capital is cash operating results and debt financing. The primary source of our liquidity is our cash and cash equivalents and Revolving Loan Facility. The primary factors affecting cash operating results are: (i) seasonality; (ii) market wins and losses; (iii) supplier mix; (iv) accident frequency; (v) total loss frequency; (vi) increased volume from our existing suppliers; (vii) commodity pricing; (viii) used car pricing; (ix) foreign currency exchange rates; (x) product mix; (xi) contract mix to the extent applicable; and (xii) our capital expenditures. These factors are further discussed in the Results of Operations and Risk Factors sections of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Potential internal sources of additional working capital are the sale of assets or the issuance of equity through option exercises and shares issued under our Employee Stock Purchase Plan. A potential external source of additional working capital is the issuance of debt and equity; however, we cannot predict if these sources will be available in the future and, if available, if they can be issued under terms commercially acceptable to us.
20

Acquisitions and New Operations
As part of our overall expansion strategy of offering integrated services to vehicle sellers, we anticipate acquiring and developing facilities in new regions, as well as the regions currently served by our facilities. We believe that these acquisitions and openings will strengthen our coverage, as we have facilities located in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., Brazil, the U.A.E., Oman, Bahrain, Germany, Spain, Ireland and India with the intention of providing national coverage for our sellers. Any acquisitions have been accounted for using the purchase method of accounting.
The following table sets forth facilities that we have acquired or opened and began operations from August 1, 2015 through October 31, 2016:

Locations |  | Acquisition or Greenfield |  | Date |  | Geographic Service Area
Sonepat, India (New Delhi) |  | Greenfield |  | October 2015 |  | India
Dallas, Texas |  | Greenfield |  | March 2016 |  | United States
Wilmer, Texas (Dallas) |  | Greenfield |  | April 2016 |  | United States
Temple, Texas |  | Greenfield |  | April 2016 |  | United States
Colorado Springs, Colorado |  | Greenfield |  | May 2016 |  | United States
Denver, Colorado |  | Greenfield |  | July 2016 |  | United States
Cartersville, Georgia |  | Greenfield |  | July 2016 |  | United States
Brighton, Colorado (Denver) |  | Greenfield |  | August 2016 |  | United States
Castledermot, Ireland |  | Greenfield |  | April 2016 |  | Ireland
Algete, Spain (Madrid) |  | Greenfield |  | July 2016 |  | Spain
Bad Fallingbostel, Germany (Hanover) |  | Greenfield |  | September 2016 |  | Germany

The period-to-period comparability of our consolidated operating results and financial position is affected by business acquisitions, new openings, weather and product introductions during such periods. In particular, we have certain contracts inherited through our U.K. acquisitions that require us to act as a principal, purchasing vehicles from the insurance companies and reselling them for our own account. It has been our practice and remains our intention, where possible, to migrate these contracts to the agency model in future periods. Changes in the amount of revenue derived in a period from principal transactions relative to total revenue will impact revenue growth and margin percentages.
In addition to growth through business acquisitions, we seek to increase revenues and profitability by, among other things, (i) acquiring and developing additional vehicle storage facilities in key markets; (ii) pursuing national and regional vehicle seller agreements; (iii) increasing our service offerings to sellers and members; and (iv) expanding the application of VB3 into new markets. In addition, we implement our pricing structure and auction procedures, and attempt to introduce cost efficiencies at each of our acquired facilities by implementing our operational procedures, integrating our management information systems, and redeploying personnel, when necessary.
21

Results of Operations
The following table shows certain data from our consolidated statements of income expressed as a percentage of total service revenues and vehicle sales for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
|  | 2016 |  | 2015
Service revenues and vehicle sales: |  |  |  |
Service revenues |  | 89 | % |  | 87 | %
Vehicle sales |  | 11 | % |  | 13 | %
Total service revenues and vehicle sales |  | 100 | % |  | 100 | %
Operating expenses: |  |  |  |
Yard operations |  | 48 | % |  | 47 | %
Cost of vehicle sales |  | 10 | % |  | 11 | %
General and administrative |  | 12 | % |  | 12 | %
Total operating expenses |  | 70 | % |  | 70 | %
Operating income |  | 30 | % |  | 30 | %
Other (expense) income |  | (1 | )% |  | (2 | )%
Income before income taxes |  | 29 | % |  | 28 | %
Income tax (benefit) expense |  | (19 | )% |  | 10 | %
Net income |  | 48 | % |  | 18 | %

Comparison of the Three Months Ended October 31, 2016 and 2015
The following table presents a comparison of service revenues for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  |  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
Service revenues |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 270,272 |  |  | $ | 217,492 |  |  | $ | 52,780 |  |  | 24.3 | %
| International |  | 36,806 |  |  | 33,475 |  |  | 3,331 |  |  | 10.0 | %
| Total service revenues |  | $ | 307,078 |  |  | $ | 250,967 |  |  | $ | 56,111 |  |  | 22.4 | %

Service Revenues. The increase in service revenues during the three months ended October 31, 2016 of $56.1 million, or 22.4% as compared to the same period last year came from (i) an increase in the U.S. of $52.8 million and (ii) an increase in International of $3.3 million. The growth in the U.S. was driven primarily by increased volume and a marginal increase in revenue per car due to a change in mix of vehicles sold. The increase in volume in the U.S. was derived from (i) growth in the number of units sold from new and expanded contracts with insurance companies and (ii) growth from existing suppliers, driven by what we believe was an increase in total loss frequency. Excluding a detrimental impact of $5.0 million due to changes in foreign currency rates, primarily from changes in the British pound and the Brazilian real to U.S. dollar exchange rates, the growth in International of $8.3 million was driven primarily by increased volume and an increase in revenue per car.
The following table presents a comparison of vehicle sales for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  |  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
Vehicle sales |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 14,790 |  |  | $ | 12,973 |  |  | $ | 1,817 |  |  | 14.0 | %
| International |  | 24,123 |  |  | 24,898 |  |  | (775 | ) |  | (3.1 | )%
| Total vehicle sales |  | $ | 38,913 |  |  | $ | 37,871 |  |  | $ | 1,042 |  |  | 2.8 | %

22

Vehicle Sales. The increase in vehicle sales for the three months ended October 31, 2016 of $1.0 million, or 2.8% as compared to the same period last year came from (i) an increase in the U.S. of $1.8 million, partially offset by (ii) a decrease in International of $0.8 million. The increase in the U.S. was primarily the result of higher average auction selling prices, which we believe is due to higher commodity prices and a change in the mix of vehicles sold, partially offset by a shift of volume for certain sellers from principal to agency business. Excluding a detrimental impact of $4.3 million due to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, primarily from the change in the British pound to U.S. dollar exchange rate, the growth in International of $3.5 million was primarily the result of increased volume.
The following table presents a comparison of yard operations expenses for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  |  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
Yard operations expenses |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 146,353 |  |  | $ | 115,118 |  |  | $ | 31,235 |  |  | 27.1 | %
| International |  | 21,258 |  |  | 20,791 |  |  | 467 |  |  | 2.2 | %
| Total yard operations expenses |  | $ | 167,611 |  |  | $ | 135,909 |  |  | $ | 31,702 |  |  | 23.3 | %
Yard operations expenses, excluding depreciation and amortization |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 138,797 |  |  | $ | 108,845 |  |  | $ | 29,952 |  |  | 27.5 | %
| International |  | 19,366 |  |  | 18,719 |  |  | 647 |  |  | 3.5 | %
Yard depreciation and amortization |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 7,556 |  |  | $ | 6,273 |  |  | $ | 1,283 |  |  | 20.5 | %
| International |  | 1,892 |  |  | 2,072 |  |  | (180 | ) |  | (8.7 | )%

Yard Operations Expenses. The increase in yard operations expenses for the three months ended October 31, 2016 of $31.7 million, or 23.3% as compared to the same period last year came from (i) an increase in the U.S. of $31.2 million, primarily from growth in volume and a marginal increase in the cost to process each car; and (ii) an increase in International of $0.5 million, primarily from growth in volume, partially offset by the beneficial impact of $2.7 million due to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, primarily from the change in the British pound to U.S. dollar exchange rate. Included in yard operations expenses were depreciation and amortization expenses. The increases in yard operations depreciation and amortization expenses resulted primarily from depreciating certain technology assets placed into service in the U.S.
The following table presents a comparison of cost of vehicle sales for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  |  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
Cost of vehicle sales |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 14,249 |  |  | $ | 12,726 |  |  | $ | 1,523 |  |  | 12.0 | %
| International |  | 18,838 |  |  | 19,342 |  |  | (504 | ) |  | (2.6 | )%
| Total cost of vehicle sales |  | $ | 33,087 |  |  | $ | 32,068 |  |  | $ | 1,019 |  |  | 3.2 | %

Cost of Vehicle Sales. The increase in cost of vehicle sales for the three months ended October 31, 2016 of $1.0 million, or 3.2% as compared to the same period last year came from (i) an increase in the U.S. of $1.5 million and (ii) a decrease in International of $0.5 million. The increase in the U.S. was primarily the result of higher average purchase prices, which we believe is due to higher commodity prices and a change in the mix of vehicles sold, partially offset by a shift of volume for certain sellers from principal to agency business. Excluding a beneficial impact of $3.2 million due to changes in foreign currency exchange rates, primarily from the change in the British pound to U.S. dollar exchange rate, the increase in International of $2.7 million was primarily the result of increased volume.
23

The following table presents a comparison of general and administrative expenses for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  |  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
General and administrative expenses |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 35,478 |  |  | $ | 29,682 |  |  | $ | 5,796 |  |  | 19.5 | %
| International |  | 4,991 |  |  | 4,933 |  |  | 58 |  |  | 1.2 | %
| Total general and administrative expenses |  | $ | 40,469 |  |  | $ | 34,615 |  |  | $ | 5,854 |  |  | 16.9 | %
General and administrative expenses, excluding depreciation and amortization |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 30,648 |  |  | $ | 26,906 |  |  | $ | 3,742 |  |  | 13.9 | %
| International |  | 4,560 |  |  | 4,533 |  |  | 27 |  |  | 0.6 | %
General and administrative depreciation and amortization |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| United States |  | $ | 4,830 |  |  | $ | 2,776 |  |  | $ | 2,054 |  |  | 74.0 | %
| International |  | 431 |  |  | 400 |  |  | 31 |  |  | 7.8 | %

General and Administrative Expenses. The increase in general and administrative expenses for the three months ended October 31, 2016 of $5.9 million, or 16.9% as compared to the same period last year came from (i) an increase in the U.S. of $5.8 million and (ii) an increase in International of $0.1 million as we continue to expand in these markets. The increase in the U.S. of $3.7 million, excluding depreciation and amortization, resulted primarily from the impact of payroll taxes from the exercise of employee stock options, partially offset by decreased compensation and professional service expenses. The increase in depreciation and amortization expenses for the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to the same period last year resulted primarily from depreciating certain technology assets placed into service in the U.S.
The following table summarizes total other expenses and income taxes for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015:

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
Total other expenses |  | $ | (2,290 | ) |  | $ | (4,486 | ) |  | $ | 2,196 |  |  | 49.0 | %
Income tax (benefit) expense |  | (64,746 | ) |  | 29,150 |  |  | (93,896 | ) |  | (322.1 | )%

Other (Expense) Income. The decrease in total other expenses for the three months ended October 31, 2016 of $2.2 million, or 49.0% as compared to the same period last year was primarily due to an increase in currency gains, primarily due to the change in the British pound to U.S. dollar exchange rate.
Income Taxes. Our effective income tax rates were (63.1)% and 35.7% for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The decrease in the overall tax rate was the result of recognizing excess tax benefits from the exercise of employee stock options of $101.4 million for the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to $0.2 million for the three months ended October 31, 2015.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
The following table presents a comparison of key components of our liquidity and capital resources at October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016 and for the three months ended October 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, excluding additional funds available to us through our Revolving Loan Facility:

(In thousands) |  | October 31, 2016 |  | July 31, 2016 |  | Change |  | % Change
Cash and cash equivalents |  | $ | 168,421 |  |  | $ | 155,849 |  |  | $ | 12,572 |  |  | 8.1 | %
Working capital |  | 273,033 |  |  | 220,523 |  |  | 52,510 |  |  | 23.8 | %

24

|  | Three Months Ended October 31,
(In thousands) |  | 2016 |  | 2015 |  | Change |  | % Change
Operating cash flows |  | $ | 74,293 |  |  | $ | 76,791 |  |  | $ | (2,498 | ) |  | (3.3 | )%
Investing cash flows |  | (39,069 | ) |  | (40,843 | ) |  | 1,774 |  |  | 4.3 | %
Financing cash flows |  | (16,738 | ) |  | (18,382 | ) |  | 1,644 |  |  | 8.9 | %
Capital expenditures |  | $ | (38,209 | ) |  | $ | (20,167 | ) |  | $ | (18,042 | ) |  | (89.5 | )%
Proceeds from revolving loan facility, net of repayments |  | 103,900 |  |  | — |  |  | 103,900 |  |  | 100.0 | %
Principal payments on long-term debt |  | — |  |  | (18,750 | ) |  | 18,750 |  |  | 100.0 | %

Cash and cash equivalents and working capital increased at October 31, 2016 as compared to July 31, 2016 primarily due to proceeds from our Revolving Loan Facility, cash generated from operations, and proceeds from the exercise of stock options, partially offset by payments for employee stock-based tax withholdings and capital expenditures. Cash equivalents consisted of bank deposits, domestic certificates of deposit, and funds invested in money market accounts, which bear interest at variable rates.
Historically, we have financed our growth through cash generated from operations, public offerings of common stock, equity issued in conjunction with certain acquisitions and debt financing. Our primary source of cash generated by operations is from the collection of sellers’ fees, members’ fees and reimbursable advances from the proceeds of vehicle sales. Our business is seasonal as inclement weather during the winter months increases the frequency of accidents and consequently, the number of cars involved in accidents which the insurance companies salvage rather than repair. During the winter months, most of our facilities process 10% to 30% more vehicles than at other times of the year. This increased volume requires the increased use of our cash to pay out advances and handling costs of the additional business.
We believe that our currently available cash and cash equivalents and cash generated from operations will be sufficient to satisfy our operating and working capital requirements for at least the next 12 months. We expect to acquire or develop additional locations and expand some of our current facilities in the foreseeable future. We may be required to raise additional cash through drawdowns on our Revolving Loan Facility or issuance of additional equity to fund this expansion. Although the timing and magnitude of growth through expansion and acquisitions are not predictable, the opening of new greenfield yards is contingent upon our ability to locate property that (i) is in an area in which we have a need for more capacity; (ii) has adequate size given the capacity needs; (iii) has the appropriate shape and topography for our operations; (iv) is reasonably close to a major road or highway; and (v) most importantly, has the appropriate zoning for our business. Costs to develop a new yard can range from $1.0 to $30.0 million, depending on size, location and developmental infrastructure requirements.
As of October 31, 2016, $122.5 million of the $168.4 million of cash and cash equivalents was held by our foreign subsidiaries. If these funds are needed for our operations in the U.S., we would be required to accrue and pay U.S. taxes to repatriate these funds. However, our intent is to permanently reinvest these funds outside of the U.S. and our current plans do not require repatriation to fund our U.S. operations.
Net cash provided by operating activities decreased for the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015 due to changes in operating assets and liabilities, partially offset by improved cash operating results from an increase in service revenues. The change in operating assets and liabilities was primarily the result of an increase in income taxes receivable of $97.3 million related to excess tax benefits from stock option exercises; an increase in accounts receivable of $12.6 million due to an increase in volume; a decrease in accounts payable of $14.9 million; and a decrease in income taxes payable of $20.9 million.
Net cash used in investing activities decreased for the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015 due primarily to reduced purchases of marketable securities, partially offset by increased capital expenditures. Our capital expenditures are primarily related to lease buyouts of certain facilities, acquiring land, opening and improving facilities, capitalized software development costs for new software for internal use and major software enhancements, and acquiring yard equipment. We continue to develop, expand and invest in new and existing facilities and standardize the appearance of existing locations.
Net cash used in financing activities decreased for the three months ended October 31, 2016 as compared to the same period in 2015 due primarily to net proceeds from our Revolving Loan Facility and proceeds from the exercise of stock options, partially offset by payments for employee stock-based tax withholdings. See Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 2 – Long-Term Debt and Note 7 – Stock Repurchases and under the subheadings “Credit Agreement”, “Note Purchase Agreement”, and Stock Repurchases.
25

Credit Agreement
On December 3, 2014, we entered into a Credit Agreement with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent, and Bank of America, N.A., as syndication agent. The Credit Agreement provided for (a) a secured revolving loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of up to $300.0 million (Revolving Loan Facility), and (b) a secured term loan facility in an aggregate principal amount of $300.0 million (Term Loan), which was fully drawn at closing. The Term Loan amortized $18.8 million per quarter.
On March 15, 2016, we entered into a First Amendment to Credit Agreement (the “Amendment to Credit Agreement”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as administrative agent and Bank of America, N.A. The Amendment to Credit Agreement amends certain terms of the Credit Agreement, dated as of December 3, 2014. The Amendment to Credit Agreement provides for (a) an increase in the secured revolving credit commitments by $50.0 million, bringing the aggregate principal amount of the revolving credit commitments under the Credit Agreement to $350.0 million, (b) a new secured term loan (Incremental Term Loan) in the aggregate principal amount of $93.8 million having a maturity date of March 15, 2021, and (c) an extension of the termination date of the Revolving Loan Facility and the maturity date of the Term Loan from December 3, 2019 to March 15, 2021. The Amendment to Credit Agreement extended the amortization period for the Term Loan, and decreased the quarterly amortization payments for that loan to $7.5 million per quarter. The Amendment to Credit Agreement additionally reduced the pricing levels under the Credit Agreement to a range of 0.15% to 0.30% in the case of the commitment fee, 1.125% to 2.0% in the case of the applicable margin for LIBOR loans, and 0.125% to 1.0% in the case of the applicable margin for base rate loans, based on our consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter. We borrowed the entire $93.8 million principal amount of the Incremental Term Loan concurrent with the closing of the Amendment to Credit Agreement.
On July 21, 2016, we entered into a Second Amendment to Credit Agreement (the “Second Amendment to Credit Agreement”) with Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, SunTrust Bank, and Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent (as successor in interest to Wells Fargo Bank). The Second Amendment to Credit Agreement amends certain terms of the Credit Agreement, dated as of December 3, 2014. The Second Amendment to Credit Agreement provides for, among other things, (a) an increase in the secured revolving credit commitments by $500.0 million, bringing the aggregate principal amount of the revolving credit commitments under the Credit Agreement to $850.0 million, (b) the repayment of existing term loans outstanding under the Credit Agreement, (c) an extension of the termination date of the revolving credit facility under the Credit Agreement from March 15, 2021 to July 21, 2021, and (d) increased covenant flexibility.
Concurrent with the closing of the Second Amendment to Credit Agreement, we prepaid in full the outstanding $242.5 million principal amount of the Term Loan and Incremental Term Loan under the Credit Agreement without premium or penalty. The Second Amendment to Credit Agreement reduced the pricing levels under the Credit Agreement to a range of 0.125% to 0.20% in the case of the commitment fee, 1.00% to 1.75% in the case of the applicable margin for LIBOR loans, and 0.0% to 0.75% in the case of the applicable margin for base rate loans, in each case depending on our consolidated total net leverage ratio. The principal purposes of these financing transactions were to increase the size and availability under our Revolving Loan Facility and to provide additional long-term financing. The proceeds are being used for general corporate purposes, including working capital and capital expenditures, potential share repurchases, acquisitions, or other investments relating to our expansion strategies in domestic and international markets.
The Revolving Loan Facility under the Credit Agreement bears interest, at our election, at either (a) the Base Rate, which is defined as a fluctuating rate per annum equal to the greatest of (i) the Prime Rate in effect on such day; (ii) the Federal Funds Rate in effect on such date plus 0.50%; or (iii) an adjusted LIBOR rate determined on the basis of a one-month interest period plus 1.0%, in each case plus an applicable margin ranging from 0.0% to 0.75% based on our consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter; or (b) an adjusted LIBOR rate plus an applicable margin ranging from 1.00% to 1.75% depending on our consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter. Interest is due and payable quarterly, in arrears, for loans bearing interest at the Base Rate, and at the end of an interest period (or at each three month interval in the case of loans with interest periods greater than three months) in the case of loans bearing interest at the adjusted LIBOR rate. The interest rate as of October 31, 2016 on our Revolving Loan Facility was the one month LIBOR rate of 0.53% plus an applicable margin of 1.25%. The carrying amount of the Credit Agreement is comprised of borrowings under which interest accrues under a fluctuating interest rate structure. Accordingly, the carrying value approximates fair value at October 31, 2016, and was classified within Level II of the fair value hierarchy.
Amounts borrowed under the Revolving Loan Facility may be repaid and reborrowed until the maturity date of July 21, 2021. We are obligated to pay a commitment fee on the unused portion of the Revolving Loan Facility. The commitment fee rate ranges from 0.125% to 0.20%, depending on our consolidated total net leverage ratio during the preceding fiscal quarter, on the average daily unused portion of the revolving credit commitment under the Credit Agreement. We had $341.9 million and $238.0 million of outstanding borrowings under the Revolving Loan Facility as of October 31, 2016 and July 31, 2016, respectively.
Our obligations under the Credit Agreement are guaranteed by certain of our domestic subsidiaries meeting materiality thresholds set forth in the Credit Agreement. Such obligations, including the guaranties, are secured by substantially all of our assets and the assets of the subsidiary guarantors pursuant to a Security Agreement, dated December 3, 2014, among us, the subsidiary guarantors from time to time party thereto, and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as collateral agent.
26

The Credit Agreement contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants that limit or restrict us and our subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends, or make distributions on and repurchase stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. We are also required to maintain compliance, measured at the end of each fiscal quarter, with a consolidated total net leverage ratio and a consolidated interest coverage ratio. We were in compliance with all covenants related to the Credit Agreement as of October 31, 2016.
Note Purchase Agreement
On December 3, 2014, we entered into a Note Purchase Agreement and sold to certain purchasers (collectively, the Purchasers) $400.0 million in aggregate principal amount of senior secured notes (Senior Notes) consisting of (i) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.07% Senior Notes, Series A, due December 3, 2024; (ii) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.19% Senior Notes, Series B, due December 3, 2026; (iii) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.25% Senior Notes, Series C, due December 3, 2027; and (iv) $100.0 million aggregate principal amount of 4.35% Senior Notes, Series D, due December 3, 2029. Interest is due and payable quarterly, in arrears, on each of the Senior Notes. Proceeds from the Note Purchase Agreement are being used for general corporate purposes.
On July 21, 2016, we entered into Amendment No. 1 to Note Purchase Agreement (the First Amendment to Note Purchase Agreement) which amended certain terms of the Note Purchase Agreement, including providing for increased flexibility substantially consistent with the changes included in the Second Amendment to Credit Agreement, including among other things increased covenant flexibility.
We may prepay the Senior Notes, in whole or in part, at any time, subject to certain conditions, including minimum amounts and payment of a make-whole amount equal to the discounted value of the remaining scheduled interest payments under the Senior Notes.
Our obligations under the Note Purchase Agreement are guaranteed by certain of our domestic subsidiaries meeting materiality thresholds set forth in the Note Purchase Agreement. Such obligations, including the guaranties, are secured by substantially all of our assets and the assets of the subsidiary guarantors. Our obligations and our subsidiary guarantors under the Note Purchase Agreement will be treated on a pari passu basis with the obligations of those entities under the Credit Agreement as well as any additional debt that we may obtain.
The Note Purchase Agreement contains customary affirmative and negative covenants, including covenants that limit or restrict us and our subsidiaries’ ability to, among other things, incur indebtedness, grant liens, merge or consolidate, dispose of assets, make investments, make acquisitions, enter into transactions with affiliates, pay dividends, or make distributions and repurchase stock, in each case subject to certain exceptions. We are also required to maintain compliance, measured at the end of each fiscal quarter, with a consolidated total net leverage ratio and a consolidated interest coverage ratio. We are in compliance with all covenants related to the Note Purchase Agreement as of October 31, 2016.
Related to the execution of the Credit Agreement, First Amendment to Credit Agreement, Second Amendment to Credit Agreement, and the Note Purchase Agreement, we incurred $3.4 million in costs, of which $2.0 million was capitalized as debt issuance fees and $1.4 million was recorded as a reduction of the long-term debt proceeds as a debt discount. Both the debt issuance fees and debt discount are amortized to interest expense over the term of the respective debt instruments and are classified as reductions of the outstanding liability.
Stock Repurchases
On September 22, 2011, our Board of Directors approved a 40 million share increase in the stock repurchase program, bringing the total current authorization to 98 million shares. The repurchases may be effected through solicited or unsolicited transactions in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions. No time limit has been placed on the duration of the stock repurchase program. Subject to applicable securities laws, such repurchases will be made at such times and in such amounts as we deem appropriate and may be discontinued at any time. We did not repurchase any shares of our common stock under the program during the three months ended October 31, 2016 or 2015. As of October 31, 2016, the total number of shares repurchased under the program was 53,456,801, and 44,543,199 shares were available for repurchase under the program.
On July 9, 2015, we completed a modified “Dutch Auction” tender offer, or tender offer, to purchase up to 13,888,888 shares of our common stock at a price not greater than $36.00 nor less than $34.75 per share. In connection with the tender offer, we accepted for payment an aggregate of 6,254,061 shares of our common stock at a purchase price of $36.00 per share for a total value of $225.1 million. Additionally, on December 30, 2015, we completed a modified “Dutch Auction” tender offer, or tender offer, to purchase up to 7,317,073 shares of our common stock at a price not greater than $41.00 nor less than $38.00 per share. In connection with the tender offer, we accepted for payment an aggregate of 8,333,333 shares of our common stock at a purchase price of $39.00 per share for a total value of $325.0 million. Our directors and executive officers did not participate in the tender offers. The shares repurchased as a result of the tender offers were not part of our stock repurchase program.
27

In fiscal 2017 and 2016, certain executive officers and employees exercised stock options through cashless exercises. A portion of the options exercised were net settled in satisfaction of the exercise price and federal and state minimum statutory tax withholding requirements. We remitted $134.6 million for the three months ended October 31, 2016 to the proper taxing authorities in satisfaction of the employees’ minimum statutory withholding requirements.
The exercised stock options, utilizing a cashless exercise, are summarized in the following table:

Period |  | Options Exercised |  | Weighted Average Exercise Price |  | Shares Net Settled for Exercise |  | Shares Withheld for Taxes(1) |  | Net Shares to Employees |  | Weighted Average Share Price for Withholding |  | Tax Withholding (in 000s)
FY 2016—Q4 |  | 1,130,000 |  |  | $ | 18.64 |  |  | 410,648 |  |  | 293,152 |  |  | 426,200 |  |  | $ | 51.30 |  |  | $ | 15,039 |
FY 2017—Q1 |  | 9,000,000 |  |  | 15.39 |  |  | 2,704,486 |  |  | 2,627,661 |  |  | 3,667,853 |  |  | 51.23 |  |  | 134,615 |

(1) | Shares withheld for taxes are treated as a repurchase of shares for accounting purposes but do not count against our stock repurchase program.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of consolidated financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts of assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses, and the related disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including costs related to vehicle pooling, self-insured reserves, allowance for doubtful accounts, income taxes, revenue recognition, stock-based payment compensation, purchase price allocations, long-lived asset impairment calculations and contingencies. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe are reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying value of assets and liabilities that are not readily apparent from other sources. Actual results may differ from these estimates under different assumptions or conditions.
Management has discussed the selection of critical accounting policies and estimates with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors and the Audit Committee has reviewed our disclosure relating to critical accounting policies and estimates in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. There have been no significant changes to the critical accounting policies and estimates from what was disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2016 filed with the SEC on September 28, 2016. Our significant accounting policies are described in the Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q.
Recently Issued Accounting Standards
For a description of the new accounting standards that affect us, refer to the Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 9 – Recent Accounting Pronouncements.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of October 31, 2016, there are no off-balance sheet arrangements pursuant to Item 303(a)(4) of Regulation S-K promulgated under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
There have been no material changes to the information required under this Item from what was disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2016 filed with the SEC on September 28, 2016.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
(a) Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
We conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act), or Disclosure Controls, as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q. This evaluation, or Controls Evaluation, was performed under the supervision and with the participation of management, including our Chief Executive Officer (CEO) and our Chief Financial Officer (CFO). Disclosure Controls are controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act, such as this Quarterly Report, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the SEC’s rules and forms. Disclosure Controls include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our CEO and CFO, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Our Disclosure Controls include some, but not all, components of our internal control over financial reporting.
28

Based upon the Controls Evaluation, our CEO and CFO have concluded that, as of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, our Disclosure Controls were effective to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our Exchange Act reports is accumulated and communicated to management, including the CEO and CFO, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure, and that such information is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified by the Securities and Exchange Commission.
(b) Changes in Internal Controls
There have not been any changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the most recent fiscal quarter that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.
29

PART II — OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
We are subject to threats of litigation and are involved in actual litigation and damage claims arising in the ordinary course of business, such as actions related to injuries, property damage, contract disputes, and handling or disposal of vehicles. The material pending legal proceedings to which we are party, or of which our property is subject, include the following matters.
On November 1, 2013, we filed suit against Sparta Consulting, Inc. (now known as KPIT) in the 44th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas, alleging fraud, fraudulent inducement, and/or promissory fraud, negligent misrepresentation, unfair business practices pursuant to California Business and Professions Code § 17200, breach of contract, declaratory judgment, and attorney’s fees. We seek compensatory and exemplary damages, disgorgement of amounts paid, attorney’s fees, pre- and post-judgment interest, costs of suit, and a judicial declaration of the parties’ rights, duties, and obligations under the Implementation Services Agreement dated October 6, 2011. The suit arises out of our September 17, 2013 decision to terminate the Implementation Services Agreement, under which KPIT was to design, implement, and deliver a customized replacement enterprise resource planning system for us. On January 2, 2014, KPIT removed this suit to the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas. On August 11, 2014, the Northern District of Texas transferred the suit to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California for convenience. On January 8, 2014, KPIT filed suit against us in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, alleging breach of contract, promissory estoppel, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, account stated, quantum meruit, unjust enrichment, and declaratory relief. KPIT seeks compensatory and exemplary damages, prejudgment interest, costs of suit, and a judicial declaration of the parties’ rights, duties, and obligations under the Implementation Services Agreement. On June 8, 2016, we amended our complaint to include claims that KPIT stole certain intellectual property owned by us and acted negligently in its provision of services. We are pursuing our claim for damages, and defending against KPIT’s claim for damages.
We have provided for costs relating to these matters when a loss is probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated. The effect of the outcome of these matters on our future consolidated results of operations and cash flows cannot be predicted because any such effect depends on future results of operations and the amount and timing of the resolution of such matters. We believe that any ultimate liability will not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows. However, the amount of the liabilities associated with these claims, if any, cannot be determined with certainty. We maintain insurance which may or may not provide coverage for claims made against us. There is no assurance that there will be insurance coverage available when and if needed. Additionally, the insurance that we carry requires that we pay for costs and/or claims exposure up to the amount of the insurance deductibles negotiated when the insurance is purchased.
Governmental Proceedings
The Georgia Department of Revenue, or DOR, has conducted a sales and use tax audit of our operations in Georgia for the period from January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2011. As a result of their initial audit, the DOR issued a notice of proposed assessment for uncollected sales taxes in which it asserted that we failed to collect and remit sales taxes totaling $73.8 million, including penalties and interest. According to the DOR, the proposed assessment was based on its initial determination that our sales did not constitute nontaxable sales for resale.
Subsequently, we engaged a Georgia law firm and outside tax advisors to review the conduct of our business operations in Georgia, the notice of proposed assessment, and the DOR’s policy position. In particular, our outside legal counsel provided us with an opinion that the sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax. In rendering its opinion, our counsel noted that non-U.S. registered resellers are unable to comply strictly with technical requirements for a Georgia certificate of exemption but concluded that our sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax notwithstanding this technical inability to comply.
Since our receipt of the notice of proposed assessment, our counsel and we have engaged in active discussions with the DOR to resolve the matter. On June 5, 2015, following our discussions and after additional review of documentation, the DOR provided us with revised audit work papers computing a sales tax liability of $2.7 million before interest and any penalties.
On June 22, 2015, representatives of the DOR and the Office of the Attorney General for the State of Georgia informed our counsel that the DOR intended to issue a formal notice of assessment for an estimated $100.0 million, based on the DOR’s original proposed assessment of $73.8 million plus additional accumulated interest and penalties. On August 4, 2015, the DOR issued an official Assessment and Demand for Payment for $96.1 million for sales taxes, penalties, and interest that the DOR alleges we owe the State of Georgia. We filed an appeal of this notice of assessment from the DOR with the Georgia Tax Tribunal on September 3, 2015. On August 5, 2016, the DOR filed a response in which it denied all allegations noted in our appeal of the notice of assessment. We continue to substantiate our position that these transactions are nontaxable sales for resale by providing the DOR with documentation supporting the exempt nature of these sales.
30

Based on the opinion from our outside law firm, advice from our outside tax advisors, and our best estimate of a probable outcome, we believe that we have adequately provided for the payment of any assessment in our consolidated financial statements. We believe we have strong defenses to the DOR’s notice of assessment and intend to defend this matter. There can be no assurance that this matter will be resolved in our favor or that we will not ultimately be required to make a substantial payment to the Georgia DOR. We understand that litigating and defending the matter in Georgia could be expensive and time-consuming and result in substantial management distraction. If the matter were to be resolved in a manner adverse to us, it could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Set forth below and elsewhere in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and in other documents we file with the SEC are descriptions of the risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements contained in this report. The descriptions below include any material changes to and supersede the description of the risk factors affecting our business previously disclosed in “Part I, Item 1A, Risk Factors” of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2016.
We depend on a limited number of major vehicle sellers for a substantial portion of our revenues. The loss of one or more of these major sellers could adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial position, and an inability to increase our sources of vehicle supply could adversely affect our growth rates.
No single customer accounted for more than 10% of our consolidated revenue during the three months ended October 31, 2016. Historically, a limited number of vehicle sellers have collectively accounted for a substantial portion of our revenues. Seller arrangements are either written or oral agreements typically subject to cancellation by either party upon 30 to 90 days’ notice. Vehicle sellers have terminated agreements with us in the past in particular markets, which has affected revenues in those markets. There can be no assurance that our existing agreements will not be canceled. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that we will be able to enter into future agreements with vehicle sellers or that we will be able to retain our existing supply of salvage vehicles. A reduction in vehicles from a significant vehicle seller or any material changes in the terms of an arrangement with a significant vehicle seller could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position. In addition, a failure to increase our sources of vehicle supply could adversely affect our earnings and revenue growth rates.
Our expansion into markets outside the U.S., including recent expansions in Europe, Brazil, the Middle East, and India expose us to risks arising from operating in international markets. Any failure to successfully integrate businesses acquired outside the U.S. into our operations could have an adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations, financial position or cash flows.
We first expanded our operations outside the U.S. in fiscal 2003 with an acquisition in Canada. Subsequently, in fiscal 2008 we made a significant acquisition in the U.K., followed by acquisitions in the U.A.E., Brazil, Germany, and Spain in fiscal 2013, expansions into Bahrain and Oman in fiscal 2015, and expansion into Ireland and India in fiscal 2016. In addition, we continue to evaluate acquisitions and other opportunities outside of the U.S. Acquisitions or other strategies to expand our operations outside of the U.S. pose substantial risks and uncertainties that could have an adverse effect on our future operating results. In particular, we may not be successful in realizing anticipated synergies from these acquisitions, or we may experience unanticipated costs or expenses integrating the acquired operations into our existing business. We have and may continue to incur substantial expenses establishing new yards or operations in international markets. Among other things, we will ultimately deploy our proprietary auction technologies at all of our foreign operations and we cannot predict whether this deployment will be successful or will result in increases in the revenues or operating efficiencies of any acquired companies relative to their historic operating performance. Integration of our respective operations, including information technology and financial and administrative functions, may not proceed as anticipated and could result in unanticipated costs or expenses such as capital expenditures that could have an adverse effect on our future operating results. We cannot provide any assurance that we will achieve our business and financial objectives in connection with these acquisitions or our strategic decision to expand our operations internationally.
As we continue to expand our business internationally, we will need to develop policies and procedures to manage our business on a global scale. Operationally, acquired businesses typically depend on key seller relationships, and our failure to maintain those relationships would have an adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and could have an adverse effect on our future operating results.
In addition, we anticipate our international operations will continue to subject us to a variety of risks associated with operating on an international basis, including:

• | the difficulty of managing and staffing foreign offices and the increased travel, infrastructure and legal compliance costs associated with multiple international locations;

• | the need to localize our product offerings, particularly the need to implement our online auction platform in foreign countries;

• | the need to comply with complex foreign and U.S. laws and regulations that apply to our international operations;

31

• | tariffs and trade barriers and other regulatory or contractual limitations on our ability to operate in certain foreign markets;

• | exposure to foreign currency exchange rate risk, which may have an adverse impact on our revenues and revenue growth rates;

• | adapting to different business cultures and market structures, particularly where we seek to implement our auction model in markets where insurers have historically not played a substantial role in the disposition of salvage vehicles; and

• repatriation of funds currently held in foreign jurisdictions to the U.S. may result in higher effective tax rates.
As we continue to expand our business globally, our success will depend, in large part, on our ability to anticipate and effectively manage these and other risks associated with our international operations. Our failure to manage any of these risks successfully could harm our international operations and have an adverse effect on our operating results.
On June 23, 2016, the U.K. held a referendum in which voters approved an exit from the European Union, commonly referred to as “Brexit.” As a result of the referendum, it is expected that the British government will begin negotiating the terms of the U.K.’s withdrawal from the European Union and the U.K.’s future relationships with European Union member states. Adverse consequences concerning Brexit or the European Union could include deterioration in global economic conditions, instability in global financial markets, political uncertainty, volatility in currency exchange rates, or adverse changes in the cross-border agreements currently in place, any of which could have an adverse impact on our financial results in the future.
In addition, certain acquisitions in the U.K. may be reviewed by the Competition and Markets Authority (U.K. Regulator). If an inquiry is made by the U.K. Regulator, we may be required to demonstrate that our acquisitions will not result, or be expected to result, in a substantial lessening of competition in the U.K. market. Although we believe that there will not be a substantial lessening of competition in the U.K. market, based on our analysis of the relevant U.K. markets, there can be no assurance that the U.K. Regulator will agree with us if it decides to make an inquiry. If the U.K. Regulator determines that by our acquisitions of certain assets, there is or likely will be a substantial lessening of competition in the U.K. market, we could be required to divest some portion of our U.K. assets. In the event of a divestiture order by the U.K. Regulator, the assets disposed may be sold for substantially less than their carrying value. Accordingly, any divestiture could have a material adverse effect on our operating results in the period of the divestiture.
Our operations and acquisitions in certain foreign areas expose us to political, regulatory, economic, and reputational risks.
Although we have implemented policies, procedures and training designed to ensure compliance with anti-bribery laws, trade controls and economic sanctions, and similar regulations, our employees or agents may take actions in violation of our policies. We may incur costs or other penalties in the event that any such violations occur, which could have an adverse effect on our business and reputation.
In some cases, the enforcement practices of governmental regulators in certain foreign areas and the procedural and substantive rights and remedies available to us may vary significantly from those in the United States, which could have an adverse effect on our business.
In addition, some of our recent acquisitions have required us to integrate non-U.S. companies which had not, until our acquisition, been subject to U.S. law. In many countries outside of the United States, particularly in those with developing economies, it may be common for persons to engage in business practices prohibited by laws and regulations applicable to us, such as the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA), U.K. Bribery Act, Brazil Clean Companies Act, India’s Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 or similar local anti-bribery laws. These laws generally prohibit companies and their employees or agents from making improper payments to government officials for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. Failure by us and our subsidiaries to comply with these laws could subject us to civil and criminal penalties that could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated operating results and financial position.
We face risks associated with the implementation of our salvage auction model in markets that may not operate on the same terms as the U.S. market. For example, certain markets operate on a principal rather than agent basis, which may have an adverse impact on our gross margin percentages and expose us to inventory risks that we do not experience in the U.S.
Some of our target markets outside the U.S. operate in a manner substantially different than our historic market in the U.S. For example, new markets may operate either wholly or partially on the principal model, in which the vehicle is purchased then resold for our own account, rather than the agency model employed in the U.S., in which we generally act as a sales agent for the legal owner of vehicles. Further, operating on a principal basis exposes us to inventory risks, including losses from theft, damage, and obsolescence. In addition, our business in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K. has been established and grown based largely on our ability to build relationships with insurance carriers. In other markets, insurers have traditionally been less involved in the disposition of salvage vehicles. As we expand into markets outside the U.S., Canada, and the U.K., we cannot predict whether markets will readily adapt to our strategy of online auctions of automobiles sourced principally through vehicle insurers. Any failure of new markets to adopt our business model could adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
In general, acquisitions increase our sales and profitability although, given the typical size of our acquisitions, most acquisitions will not individually have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations and financial position. We may not always be able to introduce our processes and selling platform to acquired companies due to different operating models in international jurisdictions or other facts. As a result, the associated benefits of acquisitions may be delayed for years in some international situations. During this
32

period, the acquisitions may operate at a loss and certain acquisitions, while profitable, may operate at a margin percentage that is below our overall operating margin percentage and, accordingly, have an adverse impact on our consolidated results of operations and financial position. Hence, the conversion periods vary from weeks to years and cannot be predicted.
We have transitioned various functionality of our previously planned third-party enterprise operating system to an internally developed proprietary system, and we may experience difficulties operating our business as we work to develop and design this system.
During fiscal 2014, we terminated a contract with KPIT (formerly known as Sparta Consulting, Inc.), whereby KPIT was engaged to design and implement an SAP-based replacement for our existing business operating software that, among other things, would address our international expansion needs. Following a review of KPIT’s work performed to date, and an assessment of the cost to complete, deployment risk, and other factors, we ceased development of KPIT’s software and internally developed a proprietary solution in its place. The ongoing design, development, and implementation of our enterprise operating systems carry certain risks, including the risk of significant design or deployment errors causing disruptions, delays or deficiencies, which may make our website and services unavailable. This type of interruption could prevent us from processing vehicles for our sellers and may prevent us from selling vehicles through our Internet bidding platform, VB3, which would adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial position. In addition, the transition to our new internally developed proprietary system will require us to commit substantial financial, operational and technical resources before the volume of business increases, without assurance that the volume of business will increase. We began using our new internally developed proprietary system with our expansion into Spain and India in fiscal 2016 and Germany in fiscal 2017.
We may also implement additional or enhanced information systems in the future to accommodate our growth and to provide additional capabilities and functionality. The implementation of new systems and enhancements is frequently disruptive to the underlying business of an enterprise and can be time-consuming and expensive, increase management responsibilities and divert management attention. Any disruptions relating to our system enhancements or any problems with the implementation, particularly any disruptions impacting our operations or our ability to accurately report our financial performance on a timely basis during the implementation period, could materially and adversely affect our business. Even if we do not encounter these material and adverse effects, the implementation of these enhancements may be much more costly than we anticipated. If we are unable to successfully implement the information systems enhancements as planned, our financial position, results of operations and cash flows could be negatively impacted.
Our success depends on maintaining the integrity of our systems and infrastructure. As our operations continue to grow in both size and scope, domestically and internationally, we must continue to provide reliable, real-time access to our systems by our customers through improving and upgrading our systems and infrastructure for enhanced products, services, features and functionality. Any failure to maintain the integrity of our systems and infrastructure may result in loss of customers due to among other things, slow delivery times, unreliable service levels or insufficient capacity, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, consolidated financial position and results of operations.
The impairment of capitalized development costs could adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
We capitalize certain costs associated with the development of new software products, new software for internal use and major software enhancements to existing software. These costs are amortized over the estimated useful life of the software beginning with its introduction or roll-out. If, at any time, it is determined that capitalized software provides a reduced economic benefit, the unamortized portion of the capitalized development costs will be expensed, in part or in full, as an impairment, which may have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations and financial position. During fiscal 2014, we recognized a $29.1 million impairment charge primarily related to capitalized software development costs, as we ceased development of a third-party enterprise operating system and decided to address our international technology needs through an internally developed proprietary solution.
Any failure to maintain security and prevent unauthorized access to electronic and other confidential information could disrupt our business and materially and adversely affect our reputation, consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
Information security risks for online commerce companies have significantly increased in recent years because of, in addition to other factors, the proliferation of new technologies, the use of the Internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions, and the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists, and other external parties. These threats may derive from fraud or malice on the part of third parties or current or former employees. In addition, human error or accidental technological failure could make us vulnerable to cyber-attacks, including the introduction of malicious computer viruses or code into our system, phishing attacks, or other information technology data security incidents.
Our operations rely on the secure processing, transmission and storage of confidential, proprietary and other information in our computer systems and networks. Our customers and other parties in the payments value chain rely on our digital technologies, computer and e-mail systems, software and networks to conduct their operations. In addition, to access our products and services, our customers and cardholders increasingly use personal smartphones, tablet PCs and other mobile devices that may be beyond our control.
33

Cyber-attacks or other cyber security incidents could materially and adversely affect our reputation, operating results, or financial condition by, among other things, making our auction platform inoperable for a period of time, damaging our reputation with buyers, sellers, and insurance companies as a result of the unauthorized disclosure of confidential information (including account data information), or resulting in governmental investigations, litigation, liability, fines, or penalties against us. If such attacks are not detected immediately, their effect could be compounded. While we maintain insurance coverage that may, subject to policy terms and conditions, cover certain aspects of these cyber risks, our insurance coverage may be insufficient to cover all losses and would not remedy damage to our reputation.
We have in the past identified attempts by unauthorized third parties to access our systems and disrupt our online auctions. These attempts have caused minor service interruptions, which were promptly addressed and resolved, and our online service was restored to normal business. In April 2015, we identified that unauthorized third parties had gained access to data provided to us by our members that is considered to be personal information in certain jurisdictions. We immediately investigated, including the engagement of an external expert security firm, and made the required notifications to members whose information may have been accessed and to regulatory agencies.
We are constantly evaluating and implementing new technologies and processes to manage risks relating to cyber-attacks and system and network disruptions, including but not limited to usage errors by our employees, power outages and catastrophic events such as fires, tornadoes, floods, hurricanes and earthquakes. We have further enhanced our security protocols based on the investigation we conducted in response to the security incident. Nevertheless, we cannot provide assurances that our efforts to address prior data security incidents and mitigate against the risk of future data security incidents or system failures will be successful. The techniques used by criminals to obtain unauthorized access to sensitive data change frequently and are often not recognized immediately. We may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures and believe that cyber-attacks and threats against us have occurred in the past and are likely to continue in the future. If our systems are compromised again in the future, become inoperable for extended periods of time, or cease to function properly, we may have to make a significant investment to fix or replace them, and our ability to provide many of our electronic and online solutions to our customers may be impaired. In addition, as cyber-threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities. Any of the risks described above could materially and adversely affect our consolidated financial position and results of operations.
Our business is exposed to risks associated with online commerce security and credit card fraud.
Consumer concerns over the security of transactions conducted on the Internet or the privacy of users may inhibit the growth of the Internet and online commerce. To securely transmit confidential information such as customer credit card numbers, we rely on encryption and authentication technology. Unanticipated events or developments could result in a compromise or breach of the systems we use to protect customer transaction data. Furthermore, our servers may also be vulnerable to viruses transmitted via the Internet and other points of access. While we proactively check for intrusions into our infrastructure, a new or undetected virus could cause a service disruption.
We maintain an information security program and our processing systems incorporate multiple levels of protection in order to address or otherwise mitigate these risks. Despite these mitigation efforts, there can be no assurance that we will be immune to these risks and not suffer losses in the future. Under current credit card practices, we may be held liable for fraudulent credit card transactions and other payment disputes with customers. As such, we have implemented certain anti-fraud measures, including credit card verification procedures; however, a failure to adequately prevent fraudulent credit card transactions could adversely affect our consolidated financial position and results of operations.
Our security measures may also be breached due to employee error, malfeasance, insufficiency, or defective design. Additionally, outside parties may attempt to fraudulently induce employees, users, or customers to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our data or our users’ or customers’ data. Any such breach or unauthorized access could result in significant legal and financial exposure, damage to our reputation, and a loss of confidence in the security of our products and services that could have an adverse effect on our consolidated financial position and results of operations.
Our business is subject to a variety of domestic and international laws and other obligations regarding privacy and data protection.
We are subject to federal, state and international laws, directives, and regulations relating to the collection, use, retention, disclosure, security and transfer of personal data. These laws, directives, and regulations, and their interpretation and enforcement continue to evolve and may be inconsistent from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Complying with emerging and changing privacy and data protection requirements may cause us to incur substantial costs or require us to change our business practices. For example, in October 2015, a European court decision invalidated the U.S.-EU Safe Harbor framework which allowed us and other companies to meet certain European legal requirements for the transfer of personal data from the European Economic Area to the U.S. We may find it necessary or desirable to modify our data handling practices as a result of this court decision, and it may serve as a basis for our personal data handling practices to be challenged or otherwise adversely impact our business. Noncompliance with our legal obligations relating to privacy and data protection could result in penalties, legal proceedings by governmental entities or others, and significant legal and financial exposure and could affect our ability to retain and attract customers. Any of the risks described above could adversely affect our consolidated financial position and results of operations.
34

Implementation of our online auction model in new markets may not result in the same synergies and benefits that we achieved when we implemented the model in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K.
We believe that the implementation of our proprietary auction technologies across our operations over the last decade had a favorable impact on our results of operations by increasing the size and geographic scope of our buyer base, increasing the average selling price for vehicles sold through our sales, and lowering expenses associated with vehicle sales.
We implemented our online system across all of our U.S., Canada, and U.K. salvage yards beginning in fiscal 2004 and 2008, respectively, and experienced increases in revenues and average selling prices, as well as improved operating efficiencies in those markets. In considering new markets, we consider the potential synergies from the implementation of our model based in large part on our experience in the U.S., Canada, and the U.K. We cannot predict whether these synergies will also be realized in new markets.
Failure to have sufficient capacity to accept additional cars at one or more of our storage facilities could adversely affect our relationships with insurance companies or other sellers of vehicles.
Capacity at our storage facilities varies from period to period and from region to region. For example, following adverse weather conditions in a particular area, our yards in that area may fill and limit our ability to accept additional salvage vehicles while we process existing inventories. For example, Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Sandy had, in certain quarters, an adverse effect on our operating results, in part because of yard capacity constraints in the impacted areas of the United States. We regularly evaluate our capacity in all our markets and where appropriate, seek to increase capacity through the acquisition of additional land and yards. We may not be able to reach agreements to purchase independent storage facilities in markets where we have limited excess capacity, and zoning restrictions or difficulties obtaining use permits may limit our ability to expand our capacity through acquisitions of new land. Failure to have sufficient capacity at one or more of our yards could adversely affect our relationships with insurance companies or other sellers of vehicles, which could have an adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
Because the growth of our business has been due in large part to acquisitions and development of new facilities, the rate of growth of our business and revenues may decline if we are not able to successfully complete acquisitions and develop new facilities.
We seek to increase our sales and profitability through the acquisition of additional facilities and the development of new facilities. For example, in fiscal 2014, we acquired a facility in Montreal, Canada. In fiscal 2015, we opened new facilities in Bahrain, Oman, and Moncton, Canada. In fiscal 2016, we opened new facilities in Castledermot, Ireland; Sonepat, India; Algete, Spain; and in the U.S. In fiscal 2017, we opened new facilities in Bad Fallingbostel, Germany and in the U.S. Promising acquisitions are difficult to identify and complete for a number of reasons, including competition among prospective buyers, the availability of affordable financing in the capital markets and the need to satisfy applicable closing conditions and obtain antitrust and other regulatory approvals on acceptable terms. There can be no assurance that we will be able to:
• continue to acquire additional facilities on favorable terms;
• expand existing facilities in no-growth regulatory environments;
• increase revenues and profitability at acquired and new facilities;

• | maintain the historical revenue and earnings growth rates we have been able to obtain through facility openings and strategic acquisitions;

• create new vehicle storage facilities that meet our current revenue and profitability requirements; or
• obtain necessary regulatory approvals under applicable antitrust and competition laws.
In addition, certain of the acquisition agreements by which we have acquired companies require the former owners to indemnify us against certain liabilities related to the operation of the company before we acquired it. In most of these agreements, however, the liability of the former owners is limited and certain former owners may be unable to meet their indemnification responsibilities. We cannot assure that these indemnification provisions will protect us fully or at all, and as a result we may face unexpected liabilities that adversely affect our financial statements. Any failure to continue to successfully identify and complete acquisitions and develop new facilities could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
As we continue to expand our operations, our failure to manage growth could harm our business and adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
Our ability to manage growth depends not only on our ability to successfully integrate new facilities, but also on our ability to:
• hire, train and manage additional qualified personnel;
• establish new relationships or expand existing relationships with vehicle sellers;
• identify and acquire or lease suitable premises on competitive terms;
35

• secure adequate capital; and
• maintain the supply of vehicles from vehicle sellers.
Our inability to control or manage these growth factors effectively could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
Our annual and quarterly performance may fluctuate, causing the price of our stock to decline.
Our revenues and operating results have fluctuated in the past and can be expected to continue to fluctuate in the future on a quarterly and annual basis as a result of a number of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors that may affect our operating results include, but are not limited to, the following:
• fluctuations in the market value of salvage and used vehicles;
• fluctuations in commodity prices, particularly the per ton price of crushed car bodies;
• the impact of foreign exchange gain and loss as a result of international operations;

• | our ability to successfully integrate our newly acquired operations in international markets and any additional markets we may enter;

• the availability of salvage vehicles;
• variations in vehicle accident rates;
• member participation in the Internet bidding process;
• delays or changes in state title processing;
• changes in international, state or federal laws or regulations affecting salvage vehicles;
• changes in local laws affecting who may purchase salvage vehicles;
• our ability to integrate and manage our acquisitions successfully;
• the timing and size of our new facility openings;
• the announcement of new vehicle supply agreements by us or our competitors;
• the severity of weather and seasonality of weather patterns;

• | the amount and timing of operating costs and capital expenditures relating to the maintenance and expansion of our business, operations and infrastructure;

• the availability and cost of general business insurance;
• labor costs and collective bargaining;
• changes in the current levels of out of state and foreign demand for salvage vehicles;
• the introduction of a similar Internet product by a competitor; and
• the ability to obtain necessary permits to operate.
Due to the foregoing factors, our operating results in one or more future periods can be expected to fluctuate. As a result, we believe that period-to-period comparisons of our results of operations are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied upon as any indication of future performance. In the event such fluctuations result in our financial performance being below the expectations of public market analysts and investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially.
Our Internet-based sales model has increased the relative importance of intellectual property assets to our business, and any inability to protect those rights could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, or results of operations.
Our intellectual property rights include patents relating to our auction technologies, as well as trademarks, trade secrets, copyrights and other intellectual property rights. In addition, we may enter into agreements with third parties regarding the license or other use of our intellectual property. Effective intellectual property protection may not be available in every country in which our products and services are distributed, deployed, or made available. We seek to maintain certain intellectual property rights as trade secrets. The secrecy could be compromised by third parties, or intentionally or accidentally by our employees, which would cause us to lose the competitive advantage resulting from those trade secrets. Any significant impairment of our intellectual property rights, or any inability to protect our intellectual property rights, could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
36

We also may not be able to acquire or maintain appropriate domain names in all countries in which we do business. Furthermore, regulations governing domain names may not protect our trademarks and similar proprietary rights. We may be unable to prevent third parties from acquiring domain names that are similar to, infringe upon, or diminish the value of our trademarks and other proprietary rights.
We have in the past been and may in the future be subject to intellectual property rights claims, which are costly to defend, could require us to pay damages, and could limit our ability to use certain technologies in the future.
Litigation based on allegations of infringement or other violations of intellectual property rights are common among companies who rely heavily on intellectual property rights. Our reliance on intellectual property rights has increased significantly in recent years as we have implemented our auction-style sales technologies across our business and ceased conducting live auctions. Recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent potentially restricts patentability of software inventions by affirming that patent claims merely requiring application of an abstract idea on standard computers utilizing generic computer functions are patent ineligible, which may impact our ability to enforce our issued patent and obtain new patents. As we face increasing competition, the possibility of intellectual property rights claims against us increases. Litigation and any other intellectual property claims, whether with or without merit, can be time-consuming, expensive to litigate and settle, and can divert management resources and attention from our core business. An adverse determination in current or future litigation could prevent us from offering our products and services in the manner currently conducted. We may also have to pay damages or seek a license for the technology, which may not be available on reasonable terms and which may significantly increase our operating expenses, if it is available for us to license at all. We could also be required to develop alternative non-infringing technology, which could require significant effort and expense.
If we experience problems with our subhaulers and trucking fleet operations, our business could be harmed.
We rely solely upon independent subhaulers to pick up and deliver vehicles to and from our storage facilities in the U.S., Canada, Brazil, U.A.E., Oman, Bahrain, Germany, Ireland, Spain, and India. We also utilize, to a lesser extent, independent subhaulers in the U.K. Our failure to pick up and deliver vehicles in a timely and accurate manner could harm our reputation and brand, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, an increase in fuel cost may lead to increased prices charged by our independent subhaulers, which may significantly increase our cost. We may not be able to pass these costs on to our sellers or buyers.
In addition to using independent subhaulers, in the U.K. we utilize a fleet of company trucks to pick up and deliver vehicles from our U.K. storage facilities. In connection therewith, we are subject to the risks associated with providing trucking services, including inclement weather, disruptions in transportation infrastructure, availability and price of fuel, any of which could result in an increase in our operating expenses and reduction in our net income.
We are partially self-insured for certain losses and if our estimates of the cost of future claims differ from actual trends, our results of operations could be harmed.
We are partially self-insured for certain losses related to medical insurance, general liability, workers’ compensation and auto liability. Our liability represents an estimate of the ultimate cost of claims incurred as of the balance sheet date. The estimated liability is not discounted and is established based upon analysis of historical data and actuarial estimates. Further, we utilize independent actuaries to assist us in establishing the proper amount of reserves for anticipated payouts associated with these self-insured exposures. While we believe these estimates are reasonable based on the information currently available, if actual trends, including the severity of claims and medical cost inflation, differ from our estimates, our results of operations could be impacted.
Our executive officers, directors and their affiliates hold a large percentage of our stock and their interests may differ from other stockholders.
Our executive officers, directors and their affiliates beneficially own, in the aggregate, 16.4% of our common stock as of October 31, 2016. If they were to act together, these stockholders would have significant influence over most matters requiring approval by stockholders, including the election of directors, any amendments to our certificate of incorporation and certain significant corporate transactions, including potential merger or acquisition transactions. In addition, without the consent of these stockholders, we could be delayed or prevented from entering into transactions that could be beneficial to us or our other investors. These stockholders may take these actions even if they are opposed by our other investors.
37

We have certain provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, which may have an anti-takeover effect or that may delay, defer or prevent acquisition bids for us that a stockholder might consider favorable and limit attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management.
Our board of directors is authorized to create and issue from time to time, without stockholder approval, up to an aggregate of 5,000,000 shares of undesignated preferred stock, the terms of which may be established and shares of which may be issued without stockholder approval, and which may include rights superior to the rights of the holders of common stock. In addition, our bylaws establish advance notice requirements for nominations for elections to our board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at stockholder meetings. These anti-takeover provisions and other provisions under Delaware law could discourage, delay or prevent a transaction involving a change in control of our company, even if doing so would benefit our stockholders. These provisions could also discourage proxy contests and make it more difficult for stockholders to elect directors of their choosing and cause us to take other corporate actions the stockholders desire.
If we lose key management or are unable to attract and retain the talent required for our business, we may not be able to successfully manage our business or achieve our objectives.
Our future success depends in large part upon the leadership and performance of our executive management team, all of whom are employed on an at-will basis and none of whom are subject to any agreements not to compete. If we lose the service of one or more of our executive officers or key employees, in particular Willis J. Johnson, our Chairman; A. Jayson Adair, our Chief Executive Officer; and Vincent W. Mitz, our President, or if one or more of these executives decide to join a competitor or otherwise compete directly or indirectly with us, we may not be able to successfully manage our business or achieve our business objectives.
Cash investments are subject to risks.
We may invest our excess cash in securities or money market funds backed by securities, which may include U.S. treasuries, other federal, state and municipal debt, bonds, preferred stock, commercial paper, insurance contracts and other securities both privately and publicly traded. All securities are subject to risk, including fluctuations in interest rates, credit risk, market risk and systemic economic risk. Changes or movements in any of these risk factors may result in a loss or impairment to our invested cash and may have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
Rapid technological changes may render our technology obsolete or decrease the competitiveness of our services.
To remain competitive, we must continue to enhance and improve the functionality and features of our websites and software. The Internet and the online commerce industry are rapidly changing. In particular, the online commerce industry is characterized by increasingly complex systems and infrastructures. If competitors introduce new services embodying new technologies or if new industry standards and practices emerge, our existing websites and proprietary technology and systems may become obsolete. Our future success will depend on our ability to:

• | enhance our existing services;

• | develop and license new services and technologies that address the increasingly sophisticated and varied needs of our current and prospective customers; and

• | respond to technological advances and emerging industry standards and practices in a cost-effective and timely basis.

Developing our websites and other proprietary technology entails significant technical and business risks. We may use new technologies ineffectively or we may fail to adapt our websites, transaction-processing systems and network infrastructure to customer requirements or emerging industry standards. If we face material delays in introducing new services, products and enhancements, our customers and suppliers may forego the use of our services and use those of our competitors.
New member programs could impact our operating results.
We have or will initiate programs to open our auctions to the general public. These programs include the Registered Broker program through which the public can purchase vehicles through a registered member and the Market Maker program through which registered members can open Copart storefronts with Internet kiosks enabling the general public to search our inventory and purchase vehicles. Initiating programs that allow access to our online auctions to the general public will involve material expenditures and we cannot predict what future benefit, if any, will be derived.
38

Factors such as mild weather conditions can have an adverse effect on our revenues and operating results, as well as our revenue and earnings growth rates, by reducing the available supply of salvage vehicles. Conversely, extreme weather conditions can result in an oversupply of salvage vehicles that requires us to incur abnormal expenses to respond to market demands.
Mild weather conditions tend to result in a decrease in the available supply of salvage vehicles because traffic accidents decrease and fewer automobiles are damaged. Accordingly, mild weather can have an adverse effect on our salvage vehicle inventories, which would be expected to have an adverse effect on our revenue and operating results and related growth rates. Conversely, our inventories will tend to increase in poor weather such as a harsh winter or as a result of adverse weather-related conditions such as flooding. During periods of mild weather conditions, our ability to increase our revenues and improve our operating results and related growth will be increasingly dependent on our ability to obtain additional vehicle sellers and to compete more effectively in the market, each of which is subject to the other risks and uncertainties described in these sections. In addition, extreme weather conditions, although they increase the available supply of salvage cars, can have an adverse effect on our operating results. For example, during fiscal 2006 and fiscal 2013, we recognized substantial additional costs associated with Hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Sandy. Weather events have had, in certain quarters, an adverse effect on our operating results, in part because of yard capacity constraints in the impacted areas of the U.S. These additional costs were characterized as “abnormal” under ASC 330, Inventory, and included the additional subhauling, payroll, equipment and facilities expenses directly related to the operating conditions created by the hurricanes. In the event that we were to again experience extremely adverse weather or other anomalous conditions that result in an abnormally high number of salvage vehicles in one or more of our markets, those conditions could have an adverse effect on our future operating results.
Macroeconomic factors such as high fuel prices, declines in commodity prices, declines in used car prices, and vehicle-related technological advances may have an adverse effect on our revenues and operating results, as well as our earnings growth rates.
Macroeconomic factors that affect oil prices and the automobile and commodity markets can have adverse effects on our revenues, revenue growth rates (if any), and operating results. Significant increases in the cost of fuel could lead to a reduction in miles driven per car and a reduction in accident rates. A material reduction in accident rates, whether due to, among other things, a reduction in miles driven per car, vehicle-related technological advances such as accident avoidance systems and, to the extent widely adopted, the advent of driverless cars, could have a material impact on revenue growth. In addition, under our Percentage Incentive Program contracts, or PIP, the cost of towing the vehicle to one of our facilities is included in the PIP fee. We may incur increased fees, which we may not be able to pass on to our vehicle sellers. A material increase in tow rates could have a material impact on our operating results. Volatility in fuel, commodity, and used car prices could have a material adverse effect on our revenues and revenue growth rates in future periods.
The salvage vehicle sales industry is highly competitive and we may not be able to compete successfully.
We face significant competition for the supply of salvage vehicles and for the buyers of those vehicles. We believe our principal competitors include other auction and vehicle remarketing service companies with whom we compete directly in obtaining vehicles from insurance companies and other sellers, and large vehicle dismantlers, who may buy salvage vehicles directly from insurance companies, bypassing the salvage sales process. Many of the insurance companies have established relationships with competitive remarketing companies and large dismantlers. Certain of our competitors may have greater financial resources than us. Due to the limited number of vehicle sellers, particularly in the U.K., the absence of long-term contractual commitments between us and our sellers and the increasingly competitive market environment, there can be no assurance that our competitors will not gain market share at our expense.
We may also encounter significant competition for local, regional and national supply agreements with vehicle sellers. There can be no assurance that the existence of other local, regional or national contracts entered into by our competitors will not have a material adverse effect on our business or our expansion plans. Furthermore, we are likely to face competition from major competitors in the acquisition of vehicle storage facilities, which could significantly increase the cost of such acquisitions and thereby materially impede our expansion objectives or have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations. These potential new competitors may include consolidators of automobile dismantling businesses, organized salvage vehicle buying groups, automobile manufacturers, automobile auctioneers and software companies. While most vehicle sellers have abandoned or reduced efforts to sell salvage vehicles directly without the use of service providers such as us, there can be no assurance that this trend will continue, which could adversely affect our market share, consolidated results of operations and financial position. Additionally, existing or new competitors may be significantly larger and have greater financial and marketing resources than us; therefore, there can be no assurance that we will be able to compete successfully in the future.
39

Government regulation of the salvage vehicle sales industry may impair our operations, increase our costs of doing business and create potential liability.
Participants in the salvage vehicle sales industry are subject to, and may be required to expend funds to ensure compliance with a variety of governmental, regulatory and administrative rules, regulations, land use ordinances, licensure requirements and procedures, including but not limited to those governing vehicle registration, the environment, zoning and land use. Failure to comply with present or future regulations or changes in interpretations of existing regulations may result in impairment of our operations and the imposition of penalties and other liabilities. At various times, we may be involved in disputes with local governmental officials regarding the development and/or operation of our business facilities. We believe that we are in compliance in all material respects with applicable regulatory requirements. We may be subject to similar types of regulations by federal, national, international, provincial, state and local governmental agencies in new markets. In addition, new regulatory requirements or changes in existing requirements may delay or increase the cost of opening new facilities, may limit our base of salvage vehicle buyers and may decrease demand for our vehicles.
Changes in laws or the interpretation of laws, including foreign laws and regulations, affecting the import and export of vehicles may have an adverse effect on our business and financial condition.
Our Internet-based auction-style model has allowed us to offer our products and services to international markets and has increased our international buyer base. As a result, foreign importers of vehicles now represent a significant part of our total buyer base. As a result our foreign buyers may be subject to a variety of foreign laws and regulations, including the imposition of import duties by foreign countries. Changes in laws and regulations that restrict the importation of vehicles into foreign countries may reduce the demand for vehicles and impact our ability to maintain or increase our international buyer base. In addition, we and our vehicle buyers must work with foreign customs agencies and other non-U.S. governmental officials, who are responsible for the interpretation of these laws. Any inability to obtain requisite approvals or agreements from such authorities could adversely impact the ability of our buyers to import vehicles into foreign countries. In addition, any disputes or disagreements with foreign agencies or officials over import duties or similar matters, including disagreements over the value assigned to imported vehicles, could adversely affect our costs and the ability and costs of our buyers to import vehicles into foreign countries. For example, in March 2008, a decree issued by the president of Mexico became effective that placed restrictions on the types of vehicles that can be imported into Mexico from the U.S. The adoption of similar laws or regulations in other jurisdictions that have the effect of reducing or curtailing our activities abroad, any failure to comply with non-U.S. laws or regulatory interpretations, or any legal or regulatory interpretations that significantly increase our costs or the costs of our buyers could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position by reducing the demand for our products and services and our ability to compete in non-U.S. markets.
The operation of our storage facilities poses certain environmental risks, which could adversely affect our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Our operations are subject to federal, state, national, provincial and local laws and regulations regarding the protection of the environment in the countries which we have storage facilities. In the salvage vehicle remarketing industry, large numbers of wrecked vehicles are stored at storage facilities and during that time, spills of fuel, motor oil and other fluids may occur, resulting in soil, surface water or groundwater contamination. In addition, certain of our facilities generate and/or store petroleum products and other hazardous materials, including waste solvents and used oil. In the U.K., we provide vehicle de-pollution and crushing services for end-of-life program vehicles. We could incur substantial expenditures for preventative, investigative or remedial action and could be exposed to liability arising from our operations, contamination by previous users of certain of our acquired facilities or facilities which we may acquire in the future, or the disposal of our waste at off-site locations. Environmental laws and regulations could become more stringent over time and there can be no assurance that we or our operations will not be subject to significant costs in the future. Although we have obtained indemnification for pre-existing environmental liabilities from many of the persons and entities from whom we have acquired facilities, there can be no assurance that such indemnifications will be adequate. Any such expenditures or liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
Adverse U.S. and international economic conditions may negatively affect our business, operating results, or financial condition.
The capital and credit markets have historically experienced extreme volatility and disruption, which has in the past and may in the future lead to economic downturns in the U.S. and abroad. As a result of any economic downturn, the number of miles driven may decrease, which may lead to fewer accident claims, a reduction of vehicle repairs, and fewer salvage vehicles. Increases in unemployment, as a result of any economic downturn, may lead to an increase in the number of uninsured motorists. Uninsured motorists are responsible for disposition of their vehicle if involved in an accident. Disposition generally is either the repair or disposal of the vehicle. In the situation where the owner of the wrecked vehicle, and not an insurance company, is responsible for its disposition, we believe it is more likely that vehicle will be repaired or, if disposed, disposed through channels other than us. Adverse credit markets may also affect the ability of members to secure financing to purchase salvaged vehicles which may adversely affect demand. In addition, if the banking system or the financial markets deteriorate or are volatile, our credit facility or our ability to obtain additional debt or equity financing may be affected. These adverse economic conditions and events may have a negative effect on our business, consolidated results of operations and financial position.
40

If we determine that our goodwill has become impaired, we could incur significant charges that would have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations.
Goodwill represents the excess of cost over the fair market value of assets acquired in business combinations. As of October 31, 2016, the amount of goodwill on our consolidated balance sheet subject to future impairment testing was $255.1 million.
Pursuant to ASC 350, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other, we are required to annually test goodwill and intangible assets with indefinite lives to determine if impairment has occurred. Additionally, interim reviews must be performed whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that impairment may have occurred. If the testing performed indicates that impairment has occurred, we are required to record a non-cash impairment charge for the difference between the carrying value of the goodwill or other intangible assets and the implied fair value of the goodwill or other intangible assets in the period the determination is made. The testing of goodwill and other intangible assets for impairment requires us to make significant estimates about our future performance and cash flows, as well as other assumptions. These estimates can be affected by numerous factors, including changes in the definition of a business segment in which we operate; changes in economic, industry or market conditions; changes in business operations; changes in competition; or potential changes in the share price of our common stock and market capitalization. Changes in these factors, or changes in actual performance compared with estimates of our future performance, could affect the fair value of goodwill or other intangible assets, which may result in an impairment charge. For example, continued deterioration in worldwide economic conditions could affect these assumptions and lead us to determine that goodwill impairment is required with respect to our acquisitions in the U.S., Canada, the U.K., Brazil, Germany, the U.A.E. or Spain. We cannot accurately predict the amount or timing of any impairment of assets. Should the value of our goodwill or other intangible assets become impaired, it could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and could result in our incurring net losses in future periods.
An adverse outcome of our appeal to the Georgia Tax Tribunal of the Georgia Department of Revenue’s final assessment in connection with its sales tax audit could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
The Georgia Department of Revenue, or DOR, has conducted a sales and use tax audit of our operations in Georgia for the period from January 1, 2007 through June 30, 2011. As a result of their initial audit, the DOR issued a notice of proposed assessment for uncollected sales taxes in which it asserted that we failed to collect and remit sales taxes totaling $73.8 million, including penalties and interest. According to the DOR, the proposed assessment was based on its initial determination that our sales did not constitute nontaxable sales for resale.
Subsequently, we engaged a Georgia law firm and outside tax advisors to review the conduct of our business operations in Georgia, the notice of proposed assessment, and the DOR’s policy position. In particular, our outside legal counsel provided us with an opinion that the sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax. In rendering its opinion, our counsel noted that non-U.S. registered resellers are unable to comply strictly with technical requirements for a Georgia certificate of exemption but concluded that our sales for resale to non-U.S. registered resellers should not be subject to Georgia sales and use tax notwithstanding this technical inability to comply.
Since our receipt of the notice of proposed assessment, our counsel and we have engaged in active discussions with the DOR to resolve the matter. On June 5, 2015, following our discussions and after additional review of documentation, the DOR provided us with revised audit work papers computing a sales tax liability of $2.7 million before interest and any penalties.
On June 22, 2015, representatives of the DOR and the Office of the Attorney General for the State of Georgia informed our counsel that the DOR intended to issue a formal notice of assessment for an estimated $100.0 million, based on the DOR’s original proposed assessment of $73.8 million plus additional accumulated interest and penalties. On August 4, 2015, the DOR issued an official Assessment and Demand for Payment for $96.1 million for sales taxes, penalties, and interest that the DOR alleges we owe the State of Georgia. We filed an appeal of this notice of assessment from the DOR with the Georgia Tax Tribunal on September 3, 2015. On August 5, 2016, the DOR filed a response in which it denied all allegations noted in our appeal of the notice of assessment. We continue to substantiate our position that these transactions are nontaxable sales for resale by providing the DOR with documentation supporting the exempt nature of these sales.
Based on the opinion from our outside law firm, advice from our outside tax advisors, and our best estimate of a probable outcome, we believe that we have adequately provided for the payment of any assessment in our consolidated financial statements. We believe we have strong defenses to the DOR’s notice of assessment and intend to defend this matter. There can be no assurance that this matter will be resolved in our favor or that we will not ultimately be required to make a substantial payment to the Georgia DOR. We understand that litigating and defending the matter in Georgia could be expensive and time-consuming and result in substantial management distraction. If the matter were to be resolved in a manner adverse to us, it could have a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
41

New accounting pronouncements or new interpretations of existing standards could require us to make adjustments to accounting policies that could adversely affect the consolidated financial statements.
The Financial Accounting Standards Board, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, and the SEC, from time to time issue new pronouncements or new interpretations of existing accounting standards that require changes to our accounting policies and procedures. To date, we do not believe any new pronouncements or interpretations have had a material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial position, but future pronouncements or interpretations could require a change or changes in our policies or procedures.
Fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates could result in declines in our reported revenues and earnings.
Our reported revenues and earnings are subject to fluctuations in currency exchange rates. We do not engage in foreign currency hedging arrangements; consequently, foreign currency fluctuations may adversely affect our revenues and earnings. Should we choose to engage in hedging activities in the future we cannot be assured our hedges will be effective or that the costs of the hedges will exceed their benefits. Fluctuations in the rate of exchange between the U.S. dollar and foreign currencies, primarily the British pound, Canadian dollar, U.A.E. dirham, Bahraini dinar, Omani rial, Brazilian real, Indian rupee, Chinese renminbi, and Euro could adversely affect our consolidated results of operations and financial position.
On June 23, 2016, the U.K. held a referendum in which voters approved an exit from the European Union, commonly referred to as “Brexit.” As a result of the referendum, it is expected that the British government will begin negotiating the terms of the U.K.’s withdrawal from the European Union and the U.K.’s future relationships with European Union member states. Adverse consequences concerning Brexit or the European Union could include deterioration in global economic conditions, instability in global financial markets, political uncertainty, volatility in currency exchange rates, or adverse changes in the cross-border agreements currently in place, any of which could have an adverse impact on our financial results in the future.
42

ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities
None.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
None.

ITEM 6. EXHIBITS

a) | Exhibits

3.1 |  | Copart, Inc. Certificate of Incorporation
10.28 |  | Amended and Restated Executive Officer Employment Agreement between the Registrant and Vikrant Bhatia, dated November 28, 2016.
31.1 |  | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2 |  | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1(1) |  | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2(1) |  | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
101.INS |  | XBRL Instance Document
101.SCH |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
101.CAL |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
101.DEF |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
101.LAB |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
101.PRE |  | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document
(1) |  | In accordance with Item 601(b)(32)(ii) of Regulation S-K and SEC Release No. 33-8238 and 34-47986, Final Rule: Management’s Reports on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting and Certification of Disclosure in Exchange Act Periodic Reports, the certifications furnished in Exhibits 32.1 and 32.2 hereto are deemed to accompany this Form 10-Q and will not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act. Such certifications will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filings under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.

43

SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

| COPART, INC.
| /s/ Jeffrey Liaw
| Jeffrey Liaw, Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
| and Accounting Officer and duly Authorized Officer)

Date: November 30, 2016
44