Commitments and Contingencies	3 Months Ended
Commitments and Contingencies	Mar. 31, 2025
Loss Contingency [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Legal Proceedings We are involved in various investigations, lawsuits, claims, demands, labor disputes and other legal proceedings, including with respect to environmental and human exposure or other personal injury matters, arising out of or incidental to the conduct of our business. While it is not possible to determine the ultimate disposition of each of these matters and proceedings, we do not believe that their ultimate disposition will have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. Additionally, we are involved in the following legal proceedings: Brazil Clause IV Pending litigation in Brazil has been brought by employees seeking to recover additional amounts and interest thereon under certain wage increase provisions applicable in 1989 and 1990 under collective bargaining agreements to which employers in the Bahia region of Brazil were a party (including our subsidiary in Brazil). Companies in Brazil have settled claims arising out of these provisions and, in May 2015, the litigation was remanded by the Brazilian Supreme Court in favor of the employees union. After denying an interim appeal by the Bahia region employers on June 26, 2019, the Brazilian Supreme Court finally ruled in favor of the employees union on September 26, 2019. The employers union has determined not to seek annulment of such decision. Separately, on October 1, 2015, a related action was filed by current and former employees against our subsidiary in Brazil to recover amounts under such provisions, plus interest thereon, which amounts together with interest could be material to us. If the Brazilian Supreme Court proceeding above had been determined in favor of the employers union, it would also have resolved this proceeding in our favor. In the first quarter of 2017, the state court initially ruled in favor of the employees. We appealed this state court ruling, and the appellate court issued a decision in our favor on May 19, 2020. The employees have further appealed and, on December 16, 2020, the court upheld the decision in favor of GrafTech Brazil. On February 22, 2021, the employees filed a further appeal and, on April 28, 2021, the court rejected the employees’ appeal in favor of GrafTech Brazil. The employees filed a further appeal and on September 12, 2022, we filed our response in opposition. We intend to vigorously defend our position. As of March 31, 2025, we are unable to assess the potential loss associated with these proceedings as the claims do not currently specify the number of employees seeking damages or the amount of damages being sought. Stockholder Class Action On January 25, 2024, a stockholder of the Company filed a class action complaint on behalf of a putative class consisting of purchasers of GrafTech common stock between February 8, 2019 and August 3, 2023 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. The complaint names the Company, certain past and present executive officers, and three entities associated with Brookfield Corporation and its affiliates (together, “Brookfield”) as defendants. The complaint alleges that certain public filings and statements made by the Company contained material misrepresentations or omissions relating to the circumstances before and after the prior temporary suspension of the Company’s graphite electrode facility located in Monterrey, Mexico, in September 2022. The complaint seeks unspecified compensatory damages, costs and expenses, and unspecified equitable or injunctive relief. On May 15, 2024, the Court appointed the University of Puerto Rico Retirement System as the lead plaintiff. On October 7, 2024, the plaintiff filed an amended complaint. At this stage of the proceedings, it is too early to determine if the matter would reasonably be expected to have a material adverse effect on our financial condition. On December 6, 2024, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the complaint. The plaintiff filed a memorandum in opposition to the motion to dismiss on February 3, 2025. On March 17, 2025, the Company filed its reply brief. A status conference is scheduled with the court for July 8, 2025. Tax Receivable Agreement On April 23, 2018, the Company entered into the tax receivable agreement (“Tax Receivable Agreement”) that provides Brookfield as the sole stockholder prior to the Company’s initial public offering in April 2018 (the “IPO”), the right to receive future payments from us for 85% of the amount of cash savings, if any, in U.S. federal income tax and Swiss tax that we and our subsidiaries realize as a result of the utilization of the pre-IPO tax assets. In addition, we will pay interest on the payments we will make to Brookfield with respect to the amount of these cash savings from the due date (without extensions) of our tax return where we realize these savings to the payment date. On April 10, 2023, the Tax Receivable Agreement was amended and restated to change the applicable interest rate from LIBOR plus 1.00% per year to the one-month period secured overnight financing rate administered by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York plus 1.10%. The term of the Tax Receivable Agreement commenced on April 23, 2018 and will continue until there is no potential for any future tax benefit payments. As of March 31, 2025, the total Tax Receivable Agreement liability was $3.8 million, which was classified as a long-term liability in Tax Receivable Agreement long-term on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of December 31, 2024, the total Tax Receivable Agreement liability was $5.8 million, of which $2.0 million was classified as a current liability and $3.8 million was classified as a long-term liability. Mexico Value-Added Tax (“VAT”) In July 2019, the Mexican Tax Authority (“MTA”) opened an audit of the VAT filings of GrafTech Comercial de Mexico S. de R.L. de C.V. (“GrafTech Commercial Mexico”) for the period of January 1 to April 30, 2019. In September 2021, the MTA issued a tax assessment, claiming improper use of a certain VAT exemption rule for purchases from a foreign affiliate. The tax assessment for the four month period under audit amounted to approximately $26.1 million, including penalties, inflation and interest. Interest will continue to accrue up to five years from the date the corresponding VAT returns were filed and inflation will continue to accrue with the passage of time. GrafTech Commercial Mexico filed an administrative appeal against the tax assessment with the MTA’s appeals office. In November 2022, the MTA’s appeals office concluded its review and confirmed the tax assessment. GrafTech Commercial Mexico believes that the purchases from a foreign affiliate are exempt from VAT back-up withholding and in December 2022, GrafTech Commercial Mexico filed a Claim for Nullity with the Chamber Specialized in exclusive resolution of substance of the Federal Court of Administrative Justice. On February 17, 2023, the MTA filed the response to the nullity petition. On May 31, 2023, the court held a hearing to determine the scope of the issues to be decided in the proceedings. At the court’s request, GrafTech Commercial Mexico submitted formal pleadings on August 1, 2023. On January 8, 2024, the court ruled in GrafTech Commercial Mexico’s favor and annulled the tax assessment. On January 31, 2024, the MTA filed an appeal for review. On March 15, 2024, GrafTech Commercial Mexico filed the Tax Adhesive Appeal for Review before the Collegiate Court in Administrative Matters who has authority to hear the MTA’s appeal. On March 12, 2025, the Collegiate Court issued a decision on the MTA’s appeal ruling in favor of GrafTech Commercial Mexico. This decision may not be appealed by the MTA. Brazil Income Tax Audit On October 23, 2024, GrafTech Brasil Participações Ltda. received an income tax assessment notice from the Brazilian Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) totaling approximately $31.0 million including approximately $18.4 million of interest and penalties, resulting from an audit carried out between 2023 and 2024, related to the period from 2019 to 2020. In this assessment, two issues were raised by the tax auditor. The first item disallowed the investment tax incentive (75% reduction of income tax), under the allegation that the Company did not have a negative tax debt certificate. The second disallowed the use of the VAT benefit (called Desenvolve) to increase the investment tax incentive. The Company believes that the IRS assessment is incorrect and does not believe that it is probable that it will incur a loss related to these matters. The Company intends to vigorously defend its position regarding both items.