XML 21 R9.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.10.0.1

Guarantees, Other Contingent Liabilities, And Other Matters | 3 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2018
Guarantees, Other Contingent Liabilities, And Other Matters [Abstract] |
Guarantees, Other Contingent Liabilities, And Other Matters | GUARANTEES, OTHER CONTINGENT LIABILITIES, AND OTHER MATTERS Guarantees and Other Contingent Liabilities Guarantees of Bank Loans and Other Contingent Liabilities Guarantees of bank loans to tobacco growers for crop financing have long been industry practice in Brazil and support the farmers’ production of tobacco there. The Company's operating subsidiary in Brazil had guarantees outstanding at June 30, 2018, all of which expire within one year. The subsidiary withholds payments due to the farmers on delivery of tobacco and forwards those payments to the third-party banks. Failure of farmers to deliver sufficient quantities of tobacco to the subsidiary to cover its obligations to the third-party banks could result in a liability for the subsidiary under the related guarantees; however, in that case, the subsidiary would have recourse against the farmers. The maximum potential amount of future payments that the Company’s subsidiary could be required to make at June 30, 2018, was the face amount, $3 million including unpaid accrued interest ($3 million at June 30, 2017, and $20 million at March 31, 2018). The fair value of the guarantees was a liability of approximately $1 million at June 30, 2018 ($1 million at June 30, 2017, and $1 million at March 31, 2018). In addition to these guarantees, the Company has other contingent liabilities totaling approximately $2 million at June 30, 2018, primarily related to outstanding letters of credit. Value-Added Tax Assessments in Brazil As further discussed below, the Company’s local operating subsidiaries pay significant amounts of value-added tax (“VAT”) in connection with their operations, which generate tax credits that they normally are entitled to recover through offset, refund, or sale to third parties. In Brazil, VAT is assessed at the state level when green tobacco is transferred between states. The Company’s operating subsidiary there pays VAT when tobaccos grown in the states of Santa Catarina and Parana are transferred to its factory in the state of Rio Grande do Sul for processing. The subsidiary has received assessments for additional VAT plus interest and penalties from tax authorities for the states of Santa Catarina and Parana based on audits of the subsidiary’s VAT filings for specified periods. In June 2011, tax authorities for the state of Santa Catarina issued assessments for tax, interest, and penalties for periods from 2006 through 2009 totaling approximately $12 million. In September 2014, tax authorities for the state of Parana issued an assessment for tax, interest, and penalties for periods from 2009 through 2014 totaling approximately $14 million. Those amounts are based on the exchange rate for the Brazilian currency at June 30, 2018. Management of the operating subsidiary and outside counsel believe that errors were made by the tax authorities for both states in determining all or significant portions of these assessments and that various defenses support the subsidiary’s positions. With respect to the Santa Catarina assessments, the subsidiary took appropriate steps to contest the full amount of the claims. As of June 30, 2018, a portion of the subsidiary’s arguments had been accepted, and the outstanding assessment had been reduced. The reduced assessment, together with the related accumulated interest through the end of the current reporting period, totaled approximately $13 million (at the June 30, 2018 exchange rate). The subsidiary is continuing to contest the full remaining amount of the assessment. While the range of reasonably possible loss is zero up to the full $13 million remaining assessment with interest, based on the strength of the subsidiary’s defenses, no loss within that range is considered probable at this time and no liability has been recorded at June 30, 2018. With respect to the Parana assessment, management of the subsidiary and outside counsel challenged the full amount of the claim. A significant portion of the Parana assessment was based on positions taken by the tax authorities that management and outside counsel believe deviate significantly from the underlying statutes and relevant case law. In addition, under the law, the subsidiary’s tax filings for certain periods covered in the assessment were no longer open to any challenge by the tax authorities. In December 2015, the Parana tax authorities withdrew the initial claim and subsequently issued a new assessment covering the same tax periods. The new assessment totaled approximately $4 million at the June 30, 2018 exchange rate, reflecting a substantial reduction from the original $14 million assessment. Notwithstanding the reduction, management and outside counsel continue to believe that the new assessment is not supported by the underlying statutes and relevant case law and have challenged the full amount of the claim. The range of reasonably possible loss is considered to be zero up to the full $4 million assessment. However, based on the strength of the subsidiary's defenses, no loss within that range is considered probable at this time and no liability has been recorded at June 30, 2018. In both states, the process for reaching a final resolution to the assessments is expected to be lengthy, and management is not currently able to predict when either case will be concluded. Should the subsidiary ultimately be required to pay any tax, interest, or penalties in either case, the portion paid for tax would generate VAT credits that the subsidiary may be able to recover. Tanzania Fair Competition Commission Proceeding In June 2012, the Company’s Tanzanian subsidiary, Tanzania Leaf Tobacco Company Ltd. (“TLTC”), entered into a two crop-year supply agreement for unprocessed “green” tobacco with a newly-formed Tanzanian subsidiary of one of the Company’s major customers. The agreement involved green tobacco purchases from four of the approximately 400 grower cooperatives in Tanzania, which allowed the customer and its Tanzanian subsidiary on a small test basis to evaluate whether it would be a viable alternative for the customer to establish its own vertically integrated supply operations in that market. Prior to that time, the customer’s subsidiary did not exist, and it only purchased processed Tanzanian tobacco from tobacco dealers in specified amounts and only for certain grades and stalk positions. In contrast, the agreement with TLTC required the customer’s subsidiary to purchase green tobacco on a “run of crop” basis. “Run of crop” requires the purchase of all green tobacco produced on the tobacco plant, regardless of grade or stalk position. The agreement, therefore, enabled the customer’s subsidiary on a small test basis to evaluate the quality of green tobacco purchased on a “run of crop” basis and to assess how such tobacco would be suited to the customer's tobacco requirements. The customer unilaterally elected to establish its own vertically integrated supply operations in Tanzania after the expiration of the agreement, and its subsidiary began purchasing green tobacco directly from Tanzanian grower cooperatives during the second crop year thereafter. Despite the pro-competitive object and effect of the agreement between TLTC and the customer’s subsidiary, in October 2016, the Tanzania Fair Competition Commission (“FCC”) notified TLTC and the customer’s subsidiary that it reviewed the agreement and provisionally concluded that it infringed Tanzania antitrust law by having the object and effect of preventing competition in the purchase of unprocessed green tobacco in the area in which the four grower cooperatives were located. The FCC also provisionally concluded that the Company’s U.S. subsidiary, Universal Leaf Tobacco Company, Inc. (“ULT”), and additional subsidiaries of the customer, were jointly and severally liable for the actions of TLTC and the customer’s Tanzanian subsidiary, respectively. TLTC and ULT submitted a written response contesting the FCC’s allegations, and on February 27, 2018, the FCC issued its decision to TLTC and ULT which confirmed its initial conclusion that the agreement infringed Tanzanian antitrust law. In its decision, the FCC concluded incorrectly that the parties to the agreement unfairly benefited in the amount of $105 thousand. The FCC arbitrarily assessed a fine jointly against TLTC and ULT of approximately $197 million and a fine jointly against the customer’s Tanzanian subsidiary and another subsidiary of the customer exceeding $1 billion. TLTC and ULT have worked closely with expert legal advisors and economists on this matter. Based on these engagements and consultations, the Company firmly believes the FCC’s allegations are frivolous and clearly without merit or support from the facts, law or economic analysis. The Company further believes the FCC’s proceedings were rife with irregularities and did not comply with applicable legal and regulatory procedures with respect to this matter, including failing to establish jurisdiction over ULT or to offer a legal justification for including ULT in the proceeding. To the contrary, the Company believes the facts, law, and economic analysis clearly support the legality and pro-competitive nature of the agreement and support a proper conclusion that there was no infringement of Tanzania antitrust law, and the agreement had no negative impact on the Tanzania tobacco market. The Company further believes the FCC’s proposed fine is ludicrous, unwarranted, and contrary to Tanzania law. TLTC and ULT immediately appealed the FCC findings to the Tanzania Fair Competition Tribunal, which immediately stayed the execution of any FCC fines. The Company is unable to predict how long the appeal process will take; however, the Company believes it could last several years. At this time, the Company believes that the likelihood of incurring any material liability in this matter is remote, and no amount has been recorded. Other Legal and Tax Matters Various subsidiaries of the Company are involved in litigation and tax examinations incidental to their business activities. While the outcome of these matters cannot be predicted with certainty, management is vigorously defending the matters and does not currently expect that any of them will have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business or financial position. However, should one or more of these matters be resolved in a manner adverse to management’s current expectation, the effect on the Company’s results of operations for a particular fiscal reporting period could be material. Advances to Suppliers In many sourcing origins where the Company operates, it provides agronomy services and seasonal advances of seed, seedlings, fertilizer, and other supplies to tobacco farmers for crop production, or makes seasonal cash advances to farmers for the procurement of those inputs. These advances are short term, are repaid upon delivery of tobacco to the Company, and are reported in advances to suppliers in the consolidated balance sheets. In several origins, the Company has made long-term advances to tobacco farmers to finance curing barns and other farm infrastructure. In some years, due to low crop yields and other factors, individual farmers may not deliver sufficient volumes of tobacco to fully repay their seasonal advances, and the Company may extend repayment of those advances into future crop years. The long-term portion of advances is included in other noncurrent assets in the consolidated balance sheets. Both the current and the long-term portions of advances to suppliers are reported net of allowances recorded when the Company determines that amounts outstanding are not likely to be collected. Short-term and long-term advances to suppliers totaled $94 million at June 30, 2018, $89 million at June 30, 2017, and $150 million at March 31, 2018. The related valuation allowances totaled $19 million at June 30, 2018, $29 million at June 30, 2017, and $22 million at March 31, 2018, and were estimated based on the Company’s historical loss information and crop projections. The allowances were reduced by net recoveries of approximately $0.8 million in the three-month period ended June 30, 2018 and increased by net provisions of $1.3 million in the three-month period ended June 30, 2017. These net provisions and recoveries are included in selling, general, and administrative expenses in the consolidated statements of income. Interest on advances is recognized in earnings upon the farmers’ delivery of tobacco in payment of principal and interest. Recoverable Value-Added Tax Credits In many foreign countries, the Company’s local operating subsidiaries pay significant amounts of value-added tax (“VAT”) on purchases of unprocessed and processed tobacco, crop inputs, packing materials, and various other goods and services. In some countries, VAT is a national tax, and in other countries it is assessed at the state level. Items subject to VAT vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, as do the rates at which the tax is assessed. When tobacco is sold to customers in the country of origin, the operating subsidiaries generally collect VAT on those sales. The subsidiaries are normally permitted to offset their VAT payments against the collections and remit only the incremental VAT collections to the tax authorities. When tobacco is sold for export, VAT is normally not assessed. In countries where tobacco sales are predominately for export markets, VAT collections generated on downstream sales are often not sufficient to fully offset the subsidiaries’ VAT payments. In those situations, unused VAT credits can accumulate. Some jurisdictions have procedures that allow companies to apply for refunds of unused VAT credits from the tax authorities, but the refund process often takes an extended period of time and it is not uncommon for refund applications to be challenged or rejected in part on technical grounds. Other jurisdictions may permit companies to sell or transfer unused VAT credits to third parties in private transactions, although approval for such transactions must normally be obtained from the tax authorities, limits on the amounts that can be transferred may be imposed, and the proceeds realized may be heavily discounted from the face value of the credits. Due to these factors, local operating subsidiaries in some countries can accumulate significant balances of VAT credits over time. The Company reviews these balances on a regular basis and records valuation allowances on the credits to reflect amounts that are not expected to be recovered, as well as discounts anticipated on credits that are expected to be sold or transferred. At June 30, 2018, the aggregate balance of recoverable tax credits held by the Company’s subsidiaries totaled approximately $53 million ($56 million at June 30, 2017, and $49 million at March 31, 2018), and the related valuation allowances totaled approximately $16 million ($15 million at June 30, 2017, and $15 million at March 31, 2018). The net balances are reported in other current assets and other noncurrent assets in the consolidated balance sheets.

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 450 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2127136 Reference 2: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Publisher FASB -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Topic 440 -URI http://asc.fasb.org/topic&trid=2144648 + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | nonnum:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- Definition Guarantees, Other Contingent Liabilities, And Other Matters [Abstract] + References No definition available. + Details
Name: | uvv_GuaranteesOtherContingentLiabilitiesAndOtherMattersAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | uvv_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration