Note 11. Commitments and Contingencies

Leases

The Company was committed under certain non-cancelable operating leases at August 31, 2015 which provide for the following future fiscal year minimum payments (in thousands):



	2016		2017		2018		2019		2020		Thereafter
Operating leases	$	1,867	$	1,287	$	592	$	132	$	98	$	104

Rent expense was $2.1 million for each of the fiscal years ended August 31, 2015 and 2014 and $2.0 million for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2013.

Purchase Commitments

The Company has ongoing relationships with various suppliers (contract manufacturers) who manufacture the Company’s products. The contract manufacturers maintain title and control of certain raw materials and components, materials utilized in finished products, and of the finished products themselves until shipment to the Company’s customers or third-party distribution centers in accordance with agreed upon shipment terms. Although the Company typically does not have definitive minimum purchase obligations included in the contract terms with its contract manufacturers, when such obligations have been included, they have been immaterial. In the ordinary course of business, supply needs are communicated by the Company to its contract manufacturers based on orders and short-term projections, ranging from two to five months. The Company is committed to purchase the products produced by the contract manufacturers based on the projections provided.

Upon the termination of contracts with contract manufacturers, the Company obtains certain inventory control rights and is obligated to work with the contract manufacturer to sell through all product held by or manufactured by the contract manufacturer on behalf of the Company during the termination notification period. If any inventory remains at the contract manufacturer at the termination date, the Company is obligated to purchase such inventory which may include raw materials, components and finished goods. Prior to the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2012, amounts for inventory purchased under termination commitments have been immaterial. As a result of the unanticipated termination of the IQ Products Company contract manufacturing agreement in the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2012, the Company concluded that it was obligated to purchase $1.7 million of finished goods inventory. As a result, this amount was included in inventory in the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet in prior periods beginning with the fourth quarter of fiscal year 2012. According to the Interim Award of the Arbitration Panel in the Company’s dispute with IQ Products Company as described in the Litigation section below, the Company has no contractual obligation to purchase the finished goods inventory held by IQ Products Company. Therefore, inventory and the corresponding accrued liability were reduced by $1.7 million in the Company’s condensed consolidated balance sheet in the third quarter of fiscal year 2015, which is the period that the Interim Award was issued by the Arbitration Panel.

In addition to the commitments to purchase products from contract manufacturers described above, the Company may also enter into commitments with other manufacturers to purchase finished goods and components to support innovation and renovation initiatives and/or supply chain initiatives. As of August 31, 2015, no such commitments were outstanding.

Litigation

The Company is party to various claims, legal actions and complaints, including product liability litigation, arising in the ordinary course of business.

On May 31, 2012, a legal action was filed against the Company in a United States District Court, in Texas (IQ Products Company v. WD-40 Company). The complaint alleged that the Company wrongfully terminated a contract manufacturing relationship. IQ Products Company (“IQPC”) also raised alleged safety concerns regarding a long-standing manufacturing specification related to the Company’s products. On November 13, 2014, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (“PHMSA”) of the Department of Transportation (“DOT”) addressed a letter to IQPC to inform IQPC that it concluded an investigation and found no evidence of non-compliance with existing PHMSA regulations or an imminent public safety hazard posed by WD-40 Company products.

Pursuant to a court order, the dispute was submitted to arbitration. Following nine days of testimony and full briefing, a panel of three arbitrators issued their Interim Award and decision on the merits of the dispute on May 15, 2015. The arbitrators rejected all of IQPC’s claims. On August 14, 2015, the arbitrators issued a further Interim Award to declare that the Company is the prevailing party in the proceeding for purposes of awarding attorney’s fees and costs.

On September 24, 2015, IQPC filed an action in the United States District Court in New Jersey against the DOT and PHMSA alleging that the PHMSA failed to properly follow the applicable regulations when it previously investigated the manufacturing and required regulatory testing of the Company’s products. The Company is not named as a party to this action, but IQPC continues to allege that the Company’s products do not comply with the applicable regulation and that such alleged failure is evidence of a dangerous condition. The Company’s position, supported by the PHMSA’s prior investigation and conclusions noted above, is that all of the Company’s aerosol products are properly manufactured and tested in accordance with the applicable regulation. The Company will monitor this pending litigation and the Company will take such action as may be necessary or appropriate to protect the Company’s interests.

The Company does not believe that there is any reasonable possibility that these matters will have a materially negative impact on the Company’s financial condition or results of operations.

Indemnifications

As permitted under Delaware law, the Company has agreements whereby it indemnifies senior officers and directors for certain events or occurrences while the officer or director is, or was, serving at the Company’s request in such capacity. The maximum potential amount of future payments the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited; however, the Company maintains Director and Officer insurance coverage that mitigates the Company’s exposure with respect to such obligations. As a result of the Company’s insurance coverage, management believes that the estimated fair value of these indemnification agreements is minimal. Thus, no liabilities have been recorded for these agreements as of August 31, 2015.

From time to time, the Company enters into indemnification agreements with certain contractual parties in the ordinary course of business, including agreements with lenders, lessors, contract manufacturers, marketing distributors, customers and certain vendors. All such indemnification agreements are entered into in the context of the particular agreements and are provided in an attempt to properly allocate risk of loss in connection with the consummation of the underlying contractual arrangements. Although the maximum amount of future payments that the Company could be required to make under these indemnification agreements is unlimited, management believes that the Company maintains adequate levels of insurance coverage to protect the Company with respect to most potential claims arising from such agreements and that such agreements do not otherwise have value separate and apart from the liabilities incurred in the ordinary course of the Company’s business. Thus, no liabilities have been recorded with respect to such indemnification agreements as of August 31, 2015.