Income Taxes	9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2014
Income Tax Disclosure [Abstract]
Income Taxes	Income Taxes The Company’s effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 was 37.4% and 27.8%, respectively. The Company’s effective tax rate for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 was 41.0% and 34.7%, respectively. The Company’s income tax rate for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 differed from the U.S. federal statutory rate of 35.0% principally due to changes in the Company’s uncertain tax positions, certain foreign income tax rate differentials, state and local income taxes, the production activities deduction, permanent differences on the goodwill write-off associated with the disposal of the component facilities, and certain other permanent differences. At September 30, 2014, the tax basis of the Company’s investment in its foreign subsidiaries exceeds the Company’s book basis. Accordingly, no deferred taxes have been recorded related to this basis difference as it is not apparent that the difference will reverse in the foreseeable future. The Company has received income tax assessments from the Danish Tax Authority (“SKAT”) with respect to the tax years 2001 through 2008 relating to the royalty paid by certain of Tempur Sealy International’s U.S. subsidiaries to a Danish subsidiary. The royalty is paid by the U.S. subsidiaries for the right to utilize certain intangible assets owned by the Danish subsidiary in the U.S. production processes. In its assessment, SKAT asserts that the amount of royalty rate paid by the U.S. subsidiaries to the Danish subsidiary is not reflective of an arms-length transaction. Accordingly, the tax assessment received from SKAT is based, in part, on a 20% royalty rate, which is substantially higher than that historically used or deemed appropriate by the Company. The 2008 income tax assessment was received in March 2014. The cumulative total tax assessment for all years is approximately $222.3 million including interest and penalties. The Company filed timely protests with the Danish National Tax Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) challenging the tax assessments. The Tribunal formally agreed to place the Danish tax litigation on hold pending the outcome of a Bilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (“Bilateral APA”) between the United States and SKAT. A Bilateral APA involves an agreement between the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the taxpayer, as well as a negotiated agreement with one or more foreign competent authorities under applicable income tax treaties. During the third quarter of 2008, the Company filed the Bilateral APA with the IRS and SKAT. U.S. and Danish competent authorities have met to discuss the Company’s Bilateral APA. SKAT and the IRS met several times since 2011, most recently in February 2013, to discuss the matter. At the conclusion of the February 2013 meeting the IRS and SKAT concluded that a mutually acceptable agreement on the matter could not be reached and, as a result, the Bilateral APA process was terminated. The matter is now before the Tribunal. The Tribunal is a branch of SKAT that is independent of the discussions and negotiations that have taken place to date. If the Tribunal does not rule to the satisfaction of one or both parties, the party seeking redress may choose to litigate the issue in the Danish court system. In 2013 the Company was notified by SKAT that SKAT had granted the deferral to 2017 of the requirement to post a cash deposit or other form of security for taxes that have been assessed for the period 2001 through 2007. During the quarter ended June 30, 2014, the Company was granted a deferral of the requirement to post a cash deposit or other form of security for taxes that have been assessed for 2008 to 2018. The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the proposed adjustments and will oppose the assessments before the Tribunal and in the Danish courts, as necessary. The impact of terminating the Bilateral APA program has been considered by the Company in its September 30, 2014 estimate of uncertain tax benefits. The Company maintains an uncertain tax liability associated with this matter, the amount of which is based on a royalty methodology and royalty rates that the Company considers to be reflective of market transactions. It is reasonably possible the amount of unrecognized tax benefits may change in the next twelve months. An estimate of the amount of such change cannot be made at this time. If the Company is not successful in defending its position before the Tribunal or in the Danish courts, the Company could be required to pay significant amounts to SKAT, which could impair or reduce its liquidity and profitability. In conjunction with this tax examination discussed above, during the year ended December 31, 2013 the Company received correspondence from SKAT requesting information regarding the royalty for the years 2008 through 2011. The correspondence indicated that SKAT would be evaluating the royalty paid for each of the years under examination. The Company has responded to SKAT’s request for information. During the three months ended December 31, 2013 the Company and SKAT agreed that the examination of this issue for the years 2008 - 2011 would be placed on hold pending the outcome of the Tribunal process. The aggregate amount of uncertain tax benefits for all matters as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013 was $44.1 million and $26.1 million, respectively. Should the amount of uncertain tax benefits differ from tax benefits recognized, such difference will impact the effective rate. The Company had approximately $11.8 million and $11.0 million of accrued interest and penalties at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. The increase in the reserve for uncertain income tax positions is due primarily to the recognition of reserves for uncertain tax positions associated with the filing of certain income tax returns in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions. The Company or one of its subsidiaries files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. The 2012 U.S. IRS examination began in March 2014. The IRS is in the information gathering phase of this examination. With few exceptions, the Company is no longer subject to tax examinations by the IRS in the U.S. for periods prior to 2012, U.S. state and local municipalities for periods prior to 2006, and in non-U.S. jurisdictions for periods prior to 2001. As it relates to Sealy for years prior to the Sealy Acquisition, Sealy or one of its subsidiaries was required to file income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. Sealy’s U.S. federal income tax returns and with few exceptions its foreign income tax returns are no longer subject to examination for years prior to 2004. Generally, Sealy’s state and local jurisdiction income tax returns are no longer subject to examination for years prior to 2000. Additionally, the Company is currently under examination by various tax authorities around the world. The Company anticipates it is reasonably possible an increase or decrease in the amount of unrecognized tax benefits could be made in the next twelve months as a result of the statute of limitations expiring and/or the examinations being concluded on these returns. However, the Company does not presently anticipate that any increase or decrease in unrecognized tax benefits will be material to the consolidated financial statements. Other than the changes discussed in the preceding paragraphs, there were no significant changes to the liability for unrecognized tax benefits during the nine months ended September 30, 2014.

Income Taxes

The Company’s effective tax rate for the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 was 37.4% and 27.8%, respectively. The Company’s effective tax rate for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 was 41.0% and 34.7%, respectively. The Company’s income tax rate for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 differed from the U.S. federal statutory rate of 35.0% principally due to changes in the Company’s uncertain tax positions, certain foreign income tax rate differentials, state and local income taxes, the production activities deduction, permanent differences on the goodwill write-off associated with the disposal of the component facilities, and certain other permanent differences.

At September 30, 2014, the tax basis of the Company’s investment in its foreign subsidiaries exceeds the Company’s book basis. Accordingly, no deferred taxes have been recorded related to this basis difference as it is not apparent that the difference will reverse in the foreseeable future.

The Company has received income tax assessments from the Danish Tax Authority (“SKAT”) with respect to the tax years 2001 through 2008 relating to the royalty paid by certain of Tempur Sealy International’s U.S. subsidiaries to a Danish subsidiary. The royalty is paid by the U.S. subsidiaries for the right to utilize certain intangible assets owned by the Danish subsidiary in the U.S. production processes. In its assessment, SKAT asserts that the amount of royalty rate paid by the U.S. subsidiaries to the Danish subsidiary is not reflective of an arms-length transaction. Accordingly, the tax assessment received from SKAT is based, in part, on a 20% royalty rate, which is substantially higher than that historically used or deemed appropriate by the Company.

The 2008 income tax assessment was received in March 2014. The cumulative total tax assessment for all years is approximately $222.3 million including interest and penalties. The Company filed timely protests with the Danish National Tax Tribunal (the “Tribunal”) challenging the tax assessments. The Tribunal formally agreed to place the Danish tax litigation on hold pending the outcome of a Bilateral Advance Pricing Agreement (“Bilateral APA”) between the United States and SKAT. A Bilateral APA involves an agreement between the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the taxpayer, as well as a negotiated agreement with one or more foreign competent authorities under applicable income tax treaties. During the third quarter of 2008, the Company filed the Bilateral APA with the IRS and SKAT. U.S. and Danish competent authorities have met to discuss the Company’s Bilateral APA. SKAT and the IRS met several times since 2011, most recently in February 2013, to discuss the matter. At the conclusion of the February 2013 meeting the IRS and SKAT concluded that a mutually acceptable agreement on the matter could not be reached and, as a result, the Bilateral APA process was terminated. The matter is now before the Tribunal. The Tribunal is a branch of SKAT that is independent of the discussions and negotiations that have taken place to date. If the Tribunal does not rule to the satisfaction of one or both parties, the party seeking redress may choose to litigate the issue in the Danish court system. In 2013 the Company was notified by SKAT that SKAT had granted the deferral to 2017 of the requirement to post a cash deposit or other form of security for taxes that have been assessed for the period 2001 through 2007. During the quarter ended June 30, 2014, the Company was granted a deferral of the requirement to post a cash deposit or other form of security for taxes that have been assessed for 2008 to 2018. The Company believes it has meritorious defenses to the proposed adjustments and will oppose the assessments before the Tribunal and in the Danish courts, as necessary. The impact of terminating the Bilateral APA program has been considered by the Company in its September 30, 2014 estimate of uncertain tax benefits.

The Company maintains an uncertain tax liability associated with this matter, the amount of which is based on a royalty methodology and royalty rates that the Company considers to be reflective of market transactions. It is reasonably possible the amount of unrecognized tax benefits may change in the next twelve months. An estimate of the amount of such change cannot be made at this time. If the Company is not successful in defending its position before the Tribunal or in the Danish courts, the Company could be required to pay significant amounts to SKAT, which could impair or reduce its liquidity and profitability. In conjunction with this tax examination discussed above, during the year ended December 31, 2013 the Company received correspondence from SKAT requesting information regarding the royalty for the years 2008 through 2011. The correspondence indicated that SKAT would be evaluating the royalty paid for each of the years under examination. The Company has responded to SKAT’s request for information. During the three months ended December 31, 2013 the Company and SKAT agreed that the examination of this issue for the years 2008 - 2011 would be placed on hold pending the outcome of the Tribunal process.

The aggregate amount of uncertain tax benefits for all matters as of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013 was $44.1 million and $26.1 million, respectively. Should the amount of uncertain tax benefits differ from tax benefits recognized, such difference will impact the effective rate. The Company had approximately $11.8 million and $11.0 million of accrued interest and penalties at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. The increase in the reserve for uncertain income tax positions is due primarily to the recognition of reserves for uncertain tax positions associated with the filing of certain income tax returns in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions.

The Company or one of its subsidiaries files income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. The 2012 U.S. IRS examination began in March 2014. The IRS is in the information gathering phase of this examination. With few exceptions, the Company is no longer subject to tax examinations by the IRS in the U.S. for periods prior to 2012, U.S. state and local municipalities for periods prior to 2006, and in non-U.S. jurisdictions for periods prior to 2001. As it relates to Sealy for years prior to the Sealy Acquisition, Sealy or one of its subsidiaries was required to file income tax returns in the U.S. federal jurisdiction, and various states and foreign jurisdictions. Sealy’s U.S. federal income tax returns and with few exceptions its foreign income tax returns are no longer subject to examination for years prior to 2004. Generally, Sealy’s state and local jurisdiction income tax returns are no longer subject to examination for years prior to 2000.

Additionally, the Company is currently under examination by various tax authorities around the world. The Company anticipates it is reasonably possible an increase or decrease in the amount of unrecognized tax benefits could be made in the next twelve months as a result of the statute of limitations expiring and/or the examinations being concluded on these returns. However, the Company does not presently anticipate that any increase or decrease in unrecognized tax benefits will be material to the consolidated financial statements. Other than the changes discussed in the preceding paragraphs, there were no significant changes to the liability for unrecognized tax benefits during the nine months ended September 30, 2014.