XML 23 R27.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT  v2.3.0.11
Note V - Commitments, Contingencies and Other
 6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2011
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]
Note V – Commitments, Contingencies and Other

Legal proceedings:

 
(a)
On June 24, 2009, a class action lawsuit, Shahrzad Tahvilian, et al. v. Steve Madden Retail, Inc. and Steve Madden, Ltd., Case No. BC 414217, was filed in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County, against the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiary alleging violations of California labor laws. The parties submitted the dispute to private mediation and, on August 31, 2010, reached a settlement on all claims. Based on the proposed settlement, the Company increased its reserve for this claim from $1,000 to $2,750 in the third quarter of 2010. In June 2011, the court approved the final settlement for $1,968. The payment of the final settlement did not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position.
     
 
(b)
On August 10, 2005, following the conclusion of an audit of the Company conducted by auditors for U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“U.S. Customs”) during 2004 and 2005, U.S. Customs issued a report that asserts that certain commissions that the Company treated as “buying agents’ commissions” (which are non-dutiable) should be treated as “selling agents’ commissions” and hence are dutiable. Subsequently, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement notified the Company’s legal counsel that a formal investigation of the Company’s importing practices had been commenced as a result of the audit. In September of 2007, U.S. Customs notified the Company that it had finalized its assessment of the underpaid duties at $1,400. The Company, with the advice of legal counsel, evaluated the liability in the case, including additional duties, interest and penalties, and believed that it was not likely to exceed $3,045, and accordingly, a reserve for this amount was recorded as of December 31, 2009. The Company contested the conclusions of the U.S. Customs audit and filed a request for review and issuance of rulings thereon by U.S. Customs Headquarters, Office of Regulations and Rulings, under internal advice procedures. On September 20, 2010, the Company was advised by legal counsel that U.S. Customs had issued a ruling in the matter, concluding that the commissions paid by the Company pursuant to buying agreements entered into by the Company and one of its two buying agents under review were bona fide buying-agent commissions and, therefore, were non-dutiable. With respect to the second buying agent, U.S. Customs also ruled that beginning in February of 2002, commissions paid by the Company were bona fide buying agent commissions and, therefore, were non-dutiable. However, U.S. Customs found that the Company’s pre-2002 buying agreements with the second agent were legally insufficient to substantiate a buyer-buyer’s agent relationship between the Company and the agent and that commissions paid to the second agent under such buying agreements, in fact, were dutiable. U.S. Customs has not made a formal claim for collection of the duties allegedly owed. At the request of U.S. Customs, the Company has waived the statute of limitations for the collection of the duties allegedly owed until December 5, 2013. The Company is reviewing the ruling, its consequences and the Company’s options with its legal counsel. On the basis of the U.S. Customs ruling, the Company reevaluated the liability in the case and believes that it is not likely to exceed $1,248 and the reserve was reduced from $3,045 to such amount as of September 30, 2010.

Note V – Commitments, Contingencies and Other (continued)

 
(c)
The Company has been named as a defendant in certain other lawsuits in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, after consulting with legal counsel, the liabilities, if any, resulting from these matters should not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position or results of operations. It is the policy of management to disclose the amount or range of reasonably possible losses in excess of recorded amounts.