Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation	6 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation	9. Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation Commitments Generic Sourcing Venture with CVS Health Corporation ("CVS Health") In July 2014, we established Red Oak Sourcing, LLC ("Red Oak Sourcing"), a U.S.-based generic pharmaceutical sourcing venture with CVS Health for an initial term of 10 years. Red Oak Sourcing negotiates generic pharmaceutical supply contracts on behalf of both companies. Due to the achievement of predetermined milestones, we are required to make quarterly payments of $45.6 million to CVS Health for the remainder of the initial term. Legal Proceedings We become involved from time to time in disputes, litigation, and regulatory matters. We may be named from time to time in qui tam actions initiated by private third parties. In such actions, the private parties purport to act on behalf of federal or state governments, allege that false claims have been submitted for payment by the government and may receive an award if their claims are successful. After a private party has filed a qui tam action, the government must investigate the private party's claim and determine whether to intervene in and take control over the litigation. These actions may remain under seal while the government makes this determination. If the government declines to intervene, the private party may nonetheless continue to pursue the litigation on his or her own purporting to act on behalf of the government. From time to time, we become aware through employees, internal audits or other parties of possible compliance matters, such as complaints or concerns relating to accounting, internal accounting controls, financial reporting, auditing, or other ethical matters or relating to compliance with laws such as healthcare fraud and abuse, anti-corruption or anti-bribery laws. When we become aware of such possible compliance matters, we investigate internally and take appropriate corrective action. In addition, from time to time, we receive subpoenas or requests for information from various federal or state agencies relating to our business or to the business of a customer, supplier or other industry participants. Internal investigations, subpoenas or requests for information could lead to the assertion of claims or the commencement of legal proceedings against us or result in sanctions. From time to time, we may determine that products we manufacture or market do not meet our specifications, regulatory requirements, or published standards. When we or a regulatory agency identify a potential quality or regulatory issue, we investigate and take appropriate corrective action. Such actions can lead to product recalls, costs to repair or replace affected products, temporary interruptions in product sales, action by regulators and product liability claims and lawsuits, including class actions. Even absent an identified regulatory or quality issue or product recall, we can become subject to product liability claims and lawsuits. We accrue for contingencies related to disputes, litigation and regulatory matters if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because these matters are inherently unpredictable and unfavorable developments or resolutions can occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. We regularly review contingencies to determine whether our accruals and related disclosures are adequate. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates. We recognize income from the favorable outcome of litigation when we receive the associated cash or assets. We recognize estimated loss contingencies for certain litigation and regulatory matters and income from favorable resolution of litigation in litigation (recoveries)/charges in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings. Opioid Lawsuits Pharmaceutical wholesale distributors, including us, have been named as defendants in a number of lawsuits relating to the distribution of prescription opioid pain medications. These lawsuits, which have been filed in various federal, state and other courts, allege violations of controlled substance laws and various other statutes as well as common law claims, including negligence, public nuisance and unjust enrichment, and seek equitable relief and monetary damages. Many of these lawsuits also name pharmaceutical manufacturers, retail chains and other entities as defendants. As of February 2, 2018, we are named as a defendant in 343 lawsuits in 36 jurisdictions. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits include 317 counties, municipalities and other entities; two state attorneys general; and 23 union and other health and welfare funds and hospital systems and other health care providers. Of these lawsuits, ten are purported class actions. In December 2017, all federal lawsuits (298 as of February 2, 2018) were ordered to be transferred for consolidated pre-trial proceedings in a Multi-District Litigation proceeding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. We are vigorously defending ourselves in these lawsuits. Since these lawsuits are in early stages, we are unable to predict their outcome or estimate a range of reasonably possible losses. In addition to the two state attorneys general who have sued us, we, along with other distributors, have, since September 2017, received requests related to an investigation being conducted by a group of 39 U.S. state attorneys general relating to the distribution of opioid medication. This investigation is part of a broader investigation of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors. We also have received civil investigative demands, subpoenas or requests for information from nine individual state attorneys general offices. We are cooperating with these investigations. Product Liability Lawsuits As of February 2, 2018, we are named as a defendant in 112 product liability lawsuits filed in Alameda County Superior Court in California involving claims by approximately 1,362 plaintiffs that allege personal injuries associated with the use of Cordis OptEase and TrapEase inferior vena cava (IVC) filter products. Another 17 lawsuits involving similar claims by approximately 28 plaintiffs are pending in other jurisdictions. These lawsuits seek a variety of remedies, including unspecified monetary damages. We are vigorously defending ourselves in these lawsuits. At December 31, 2017, we had a total of $184 million, net of expected insurance recoveries, accrued for losses and legal defense costs related to the Cordis IVC filter lawsuits. While we have recorded accruals based on our assessment of these matters, because these lawsuits are in early stages, we are unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses in excess of this accrued amount.

9. Commitments, Contingent Liabilities and Litigation

Commitments

Generic Sourcing Venture with CVS Health Corporation ("CVS Health")

In July 2014, we established Red Oak Sourcing, LLC ("Red Oak Sourcing"), a U.S.-based generic pharmaceutical sourcing venture with CVS Health for an initial term of 10 years. Red Oak Sourcing negotiates generic pharmaceutical supply contracts on behalf of both companies. Due to the achievement of predetermined milestones, we are required to make quarterly payments of $45.6 million to CVS Health for the remainder of the initial term.

Legal Proceedings

We become involved from time to time in disputes, litigation, and regulatory matters.

We may be named from time to time in qui tam actions initiated by private third parties. In such actions, the private parties purport to act on behalf of federal or state governments, allege that false claims have been submitted for payment by the government and may receive an award if their claims are successful. After a private party has filed a qui tam action, the government must investigate the private party's claim and determine whether to intervene in and take control over the litigation. These actions may remain under seal while the government makes this determination. If the government declines to intervene, the private party may nonetheless continue to pursue the litigation on his or her own purporting to act on behalf of the government.

From time to time, we become aware through employees, internal audits or other parties of possible compliance matters, such as complaints or concerns relating to accounting, internal accounting controls, financial reporting, auditing, or other ethical matters or relating to compliance with laws such as healthcare fraud and abuse, anti-corruption or anti-bribery laws. When we become aware of such possible compliance matters, we investigate internally and take appropriate corrective action. In addition, from time to time, we receive subpoenas or requests for information from various federal or state agencies relating to our business or to the business of a customer, supplier or other industry participants. Internal investigations, subpoenas or requests for information could lead to the assertion of claims or the commencement of legal proceedings against us or result in sanctions.

From time to time, we may determine that products we manufacture or market do not meet our specifications, regulatory requirements, or published standards. When we or a regulatory agency identify a potential quality or regulatory issue, we investigate and take appropriate corrective action. Such actions can lead to product recalls, costs to repair or replace affected products, temporary interruptions in product sales, action by regulators and product liability claims and lawsuits, including class actions. Even absent an identified regulatory or quality issue or product recall, we can become subject to product liability claims and lawsuits.

We accrue for contingencies related to disputes, litigation and regulatory matters if it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Because these matters are inherently unpredictable and unfavorable developments or resolutions can occur, assessing contingencies is highly subjective and requires judgments about future events. We regularly review contingencies to determine whether our accruals and related disclosures are adequate. The amount of ultimate loss may differ from these estimates.

We recognize income from the favorable outcome of litigation when we receive the associated cash or assets.

We recognize estimated loss contingencies for certain litigation and regulatory matters and income from favorable resolution of litigation in litigation (recoveries)/charges in our condensed consolidated statements of earnings.

Opioid Lawsuits

Pharmaceutical wholesale distributors, including us, have been named as defendants in a number of lawsuits relating to the distribution of prescription opioid pain medications. These lawsuits, which have been filed in various federal, state and other courts, allege violations of controlled substance laws and various other statutes as well as common law claims, including negligence, public nuisance and unjust enrichment, and seek equitable relief and monetary damages. Many of these lawsuits also name pharmaceutical manufacturers, retail chains and other entities as defendants.

As of February 2, 2018, we are named as a defendant in 343 lawsuits in 36 jurisdictions. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits include 317 counties, municipalities and other entities; two state attorneys general; and 23 union and other health and welfare funds and hospital systems and other health care providers. Of these lawsuits, ten are purported class actions. In December 2017, all federal lawsuits (298 as of February 2, 2018) were ordered to be transferred for consolidated pre-trial proceedings in a Multi-District Litigation proceeding in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. We are vigorously defending ourselves in these lawsuits. Since these lawsuits are in early stages, we are unable to predict their outcome or estimate a range of reasonably possible losses.

In addition to the two state attorneys general who have sued us, we, along with other distributors, have, since September 2017, received requests related to an investigation being conducted by a group of 39 U.S. state attorneys general relating to the distribution of opioid medication. This investigation is part of a broader investigation of pharmaceutical manufacturers and distributors. We also have received civil investigative demands, subpoenas or requests for information from nine individual state attorneys general offices. We are cooperating with these investigations.

Product Liability Lawsuits

As of February 2, 2018, we are named as a defendant in 112 product liability lawsuits filed in Alameda County Superior Court in California involving claims by approximately 1,362 plaintiffs that allege personal injuries associated with the use of Cordis OptEase and TrapEase inferior vena cava (IVC) filter products. Another 17 lawsuits involving similar claims by approximately 28 plaintiffs are pending in other jurisdictions. These lawsuits seek a variety of remedies, including unspecified monetary damages. We are vigorously defending ourselves in these lawsuits.

At December 31, 2017, we had a total of $184 million, net of expected insurance recoveries, accrued for losses and legal defense costs related to the Cordis IVC filter lawsuits. While we have recorded accruals based on our assessment of these matters, because these lawsuits are in early stages, we are unable to estimate a range of reasonably possible losses in excess of this accrued amount.