XML 25 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.24.2.u1

Note 6 - Commitments and Contingencies | 6 Months Ended
--- | ---
Jun. 30, 2024
Notes to Financial Statements |
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block] | NOTE 6: COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES As of June 30, 2024, the Company had outstanding letters of credit of $27 million issued under the Amended and Restated Letter of Credit Facility Agreement ("L/C Facility Agreement") as well as bank guarantees and letters of credit of $1 million, surety bonds in the amount of $27 million, and restricted cash of $109 million, primarily related to cash collateral supporting the Company’s undiscounted actuarial workers’ compensation obligations with the NYS WCB, cash collateral to ensure payment of possible casualty and workers’ compensation claims, for the outstanding letters of credit under the Letter of Credit Facility Agreement, to ensure payment of possible legal contingencies, hedging activities, environmental liabilities, rental payments and to support various customs, tax and trade activities. Kodak’s Brazilian operations are involved in various litigation matters in Brazil and have received or been the subject of numerous governmental assessments related to indirect and other taxes in various stages of litigation, as well as civil litigation and disputes associated with former employees and contract labor. The tax matters, which comprise the majority of the litigation matters, are primarily related to federal and state value-added taxes. Kodak’s Brazilian operations are disputing these matters and intend to vigorously defend its position. Kodak routinely assesses all these matters as to the probability of ultimately incurring a liability in its Brazilian operations and records its best estimate of the ultimate loss in situations where it assesses the likelihood of loss as probable. As of June 30, 2024, Kodak’s Brazilian operations maintained accruals of approximately $3 million for claims aggregating approximately $85 million inclusive of interest and penalties where appropriate. The unreserved portion of the indirect taxes, civil litigation and disputes associated with former employees and contract labor claims, inclusive of any related interest and penalties, for which there was at least a reasonable possibility that a loss may be incurred, amounted to approximately $5 million. In connection with assessments in Brazil, local regulations may require Kodak’s Brazilian operations to post security for a portion of the amounts in dispute. As of June 30, 2024, Kodak’s Brazilian operations have posted security composed of $7 million of pledged cash reported within Restricted cash in the Consolidated Statement of Financial Position and liens on certain Brazilian assets with a net book value of approximately $39 million. Generally, any encumbrances on the Brazilian assets would be removed to the extent the matter is resolved in favor of Kodak’s Brazilian operations. The matter securing the lien on the non-cash assets was resolved in favor of Kodak’s Brazilian operations on March 12, 2024 and those operations are in the process of having the lien on those assets removed. The Company has received five requests under New Jersey law demanding, among other things, that the Company take certain actions in response to alleged breaches of fiduciary duty relating to option grants and securities transactions and alleged proxy statement disclosure deficiencies (each a “Derivative Demand”, and collectively the “Derivative Demands”) in the context of an announcement on July 28, 2020 (the “DFC Announcement”) by the U.S. International Development Finance Corporation (the “DFC”) regarding the signing of a non-binding letter of interest to provide a subsidiary of the Company with a potential $765 million loan (the “DFC Loan”) to support the launch of Kodak Pharmaceuticals, an initiative that would manufacture pharmaceutical ingredients for essential generic drugs (the “DFC Pharmaceutical Project”). On May 19, 2021 Louis Peters, one of the persons making a Derivative Demand (“Peters”), commenced a derivative lawsuit on behalf of the Company against certain officers and current and former directors of the Company and the Company as a nominal defendant in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in Monroe County seeking damages and equitable relief based on alleged breaches of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment resulting from stock trades, option grants and a charitable contribution in the context of the DFC Announcement of the potential DFC Loan and DFC Pharmaceutical Project (the “State Derivative Lawsuit”). The plaintiff filed an amended complaint in the State Derivative Lawsuit on August 23, 2021, and the Company and individual defendants filed motions to dismiss (or alternatively, in the case of the Company, a motion for summary judgment) in the State Derivative Lawsuit on October 22, 2021. On March 17, 2022, the court issued an order staying the State Derivative Lawsuit pending the resolution of the Federal Derivative Lawsuit described below. On September 2, 2021 Herbert Silverberg, another person making a Derivative Demand (“Silverberg”), commenced a derivative lawsuit on behalf of the Company against one current and one former director of the Company and the Company as a nominal defendant in the Federal District Court for the Western District of New York seeking damages and equitable relief on a basis overlapping with the State Derivative Lawsuit and alleged proxy statement misrepresentations and omissions. On October 4, 2021 Peters commenced a derivative lawsuit on behalf of the Company against the same parties named in the State Derivative Lawsuit in the Federal District Court for the Western District of New York seeking damages and equitable relief on a basis overlapping with the State Derivative Lawsuit and alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act. The Federal derivative lawsuits filed by Silverberg and Peters were consolidated into a single proceeding (the “Federal Derivative Lawsuit”) on January 18, 2022, and Peters was appointed as lead plaintiff in the Federal Derivative Lawsuit. An amended consolidated complaint combining the allegations contained in the Federal derivative lawsuits filed by Silverberg and Peters was filed in the Federal Derivative Lawsuit on February 16, 2022, and the Company and individual defendants served motions to dismiss or, in the alternative in the case of the Company, for summary judgment on April 15, 2022. Threshold discovery in the case was completed, and the Company and individual defendants formally filed their motions to dismiss/for summary judgment on September 30, 2022. The plaintiffs filed an opposition to the motions to dismiss/for summary judgment on November 14, 2022, and the Company and the individual defendants filed responses to the plaintiffs’ opposition on December 27, 2022 and December 23, 2022, respectively. A hearing with respect to the motions to dismiss/for summary judgment was held on August 9, 2023, and the lawsuit was dismissed in its entirety with prejudice on September 26, 2023. The plaintiffs/appellants filed a notice of appeal of the dismissal on October 25, 2023 and filed their brief on appeal on March 21, 2024. The Company filed its response brief on June 20, 2024, and the plaintiffs/appellants filed their reply brief on July 11, 2024. Additional shareholder derivative lawsuits may be brought based on the other Derivative Demands (any such lawsuits, collectively with the State Derivative Lawsuit, the Federal Derivative Lawsuit and the Fiduciary Class Action, the “Fiduciary Matters”). The Company, acting through a Special Committee of Independent Directors, previously determined that there was no merit to the claims alleged by the Derivative Demands made through the time of its determination (except with respect to the charitable contribution, which was not fully considered by the Special Committee). See the Company’s Current Report on Form 8‐K filed with the SEC on September 16, 2020. The Company, acting through a separate Special Litigation Committee of Independent Directors, concurred with the first Special Committee’s findings and further concluded that it is not in the Company’s interest to bring or allow any other shareholder to assert any of the claims alleged by the State Derivative Lawsuit or Federal Derivative Lawsuit (with the exception of the Peters claim purportedly arising under Section 10(b) of the Exchange Act, which was not addressed as no demand was made with respect to such claim). The second Special Litigation Committee will carefully review any other additional complaints constituting Fiduciary Matters which may be filed. The DFC Announcement has also prompted investigations by several congressional committees, the SEC and the New York Attorney General’s office. The Company has cooperated in those investigations. In addition, Kodak is involved in various lawsuits, claims, investigations, remediations and proceedings, including, from time to time, commercial, customs, employment, environmental, tort and health and safety matters, which are being handled and defended in the ordinary course of business. Kodak is also subject, from time to time, to various assertions, claims, proceedings and requests for indemnification concerning intellectual property, including patent infringement suits involving technologies that are incorporated in a broad spectrum of Kodak’s products. These matters are in various stages of investigation and litigation and are being vigorously defended. Based on information currently available, Kodak does not believe that it is probable that the outcomes in these various matters, individually or collectively, will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition or results of operations. Litigation is inherently unpredictable, and judgments could be rendered or settlements entered that could adversely affect Kodak’s operating results or cash flows in a particular period. Kodak routinely assesses all of its litigation and threatened litigation as to the probability of ultimately incurring a liability and records its best estimate of the ultimate loss in situations where it assesses the likelihood of loss as probable.

X
- Definition The entire disclosure for commitments and contingencies. + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 405 -SubTopic 30 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/405-30/tableOfContent Reference 2: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 3: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Topic 450 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/450/tableOfContent Reference 4: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 954 -SubTopic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 1 -Subparagraph (a) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147478522/954-440-50-1 Reference 5: http://www.xbrl.org/2003/role/disclosureRef -Topic 440 -SubTopic 10 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Section 50 -Paragraph 4 -Subparagraph (c) -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/1943274/2147482648/440-10-50-4 Reference 6: http://fasb.org/us-gaap/role/ref/legacyRef -Topic 440 -Name Accounting Standards Codification -Publisher FASB -URI https://asc.fasb.org/440/tableOfContent + Details
Name: | us-gaap_CommitmentsAndContingenciesDisclosureTextBlock
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

X
- References No definition available. + Details
Name: | us-gaap_DisclosureTextBlockAbstract
Namespace Prefix: | us-gaap_
Data Type: | xbrli:stringItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration