XML 58 R37.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT
v3.23.1

Note 26 - Contingencies, Commitments and Restrictions On the Distribution of Profits | 12 Months Ended
--- | ---
Dec. 31, 2022
Disclosure of Contingencies, Commitments and Restrictions on Distribution of Profits [Abstract] |
Note 26 - Contingencies, Commitments and Restrictions On the Distribution of Profits | 26 Contingencies, commitments and restrictions o n the distribution of profits (i) Contingencies Tenaris is from time to time subject to various claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings, including customer, employee, tax and environmental-related claims, in which third parties are seeking payment for alleged damages, reimbursement for losses, or indemnity. Management with the assistance of legal counsel periodically reviews the status of each significant matter and assesses potential financial exposure. Some of these claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings involve highly complex issues, and often these issues are subject to substantial uncertainties and, therefore, the probability of loss and an estimation of damages are difficult to ascertain. Accordingly, with respect to a large portion of such claims, lawsuits and other legal proceedings, the Company is unable to make a reliable estimate of the expected financial effect that will result from ultimate resolution of the proceeding. In those cases, the Company has not accrued a provision for the potential outcome of these cases. If a potential loss from a claim, lawsuit or other proceeding is considered probable and the amount can be reasonably estimated, a provision is recorded. Accruals for loss contingencies reflect a reasonable estimate of the losses to be incurred based on information available to management as of the date of preparation of the financial statements and take into consideration litigation and settlement strategies. In a limited number of ongoing cases, the Company was able to make a reliable estimate of the expected loss or range of probable loss and, depending on the likelihood of occurrence, in some of such cases has accrued a provision for such loss but believes that publication of this information on a case-by-case basis would seriously prejudice the Tenaris’s position in the ongoing legal proceedings or in any related settlement discussions. Accordingly, in these cases, the Company has disclosed information with respect to the nature of the contingency but has not disclosed its estimate of the range of potential loss. The Company believes that the aggregate provisions recorded for potential losses in these Consolidated Financial Statements are adequate based upon currently available information. However, if management’s estimates prove incorrect, current reserves could be inadequate and the Company could incur a charge to earnings which could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, financial condition, net worth and cash flows. Below is a summary description of Tenaris’s material legal proceedings which are outstanding as of the date of these Consolidated Financial Statements. In addition, the Company is subject to other legal proceedings, none of which is believed to be material. CSN claims relating to the January 2012 acquisition of Usiminas Confab, a Brazilian subsidiary of the Company, is one of the defendants in a lawsuit filed in Brazil by Companhia Siderúrgica Nacional (“CSN”) and various entities affiliated with CSN against Confab and several Ternium subsidiaries that acquired a participation in Usiminas’ control group in January 2012. The CSN lawsuit alleges that, under applicable Brazilian laws and rules, the acquirers were required to launch a tag-along tender offer to all non-controlling holders of Usiminas’ ordinary shares for a price per share equal to 80% of the price per share paid in such acquisition, or BRL28.8, and seeks an order to compel the acquirers to launch an offer at that price plus interest. If so ordered, the offer would need to be made to 182,609,851 ordinary shares of Usiminas not belonging to Usiminas’ control group, and Confab would have a 17.9% share in that offer. On September 23, 2013, the first instance court dismissed the CSN lawsuit, and on February 8, 2017, the court of appeals maintained the understanding of the first instance court. On August 18, 2017, CSN filed an appeal to the Superior Court of Justice seeking the review and reversal of the decision issued by the Court of Appeals. On March 5, 2018, the court of appeals ruled that CSN’s appeal did not meet the requirements for submission to the Superior Court of Justice and rejected the appeal. On May 8, 2018, CSN appealed against such ruling and on January 22, 2019, the court of appeals rejected it and ordered that the case be submitted to the Superior Court of Justice. On September 10, 2019, the Superior Court of Justice declared CSN’s appeal admissible. On March 7, 2023, the Superior Court of Justice, by majority vote, rejected CSN’s appeal. Plaintiffs may still appeal against the Superior Court of Justice’s decision. At this time, the Company cannot predict whether CSN will appeal against the decision and, if appealed, the ultimate resolution of the matter. The Company continues to believe that all of CSN’s claims and allegations are groundless and without merit, as confirmed by several opinions of Brazilian legal counsel, two decisions issued by the Brazilian securities regulator (“CVM”) in February 2012 and December 2016, the first and second instance court decisions and the March 2023 decision of the Superior Court of Justice referred to above. Veracel celulose accident litigation On September 21, 2007, an accident occurred in the premises of Veracel Celulose S.A. (“Veracel”) in connection with a rupture in one of the tanks used in an evaporation system manufactured by Confab. The Veracel accident allegedly resulted in material damages to Veracel. Itaú Seguros S.A. (“Itaú”), Veracel’s insurer at the time of the Veracel accident and then replaced by Chubb Seguros Brasil S/A (“Chubb”), initiated a lawsuit against Confab seeking reimbursement of damages paid to Veracel in connection with the Veracel accident. Veracel initiated a second lawsuit against Confab seeking reimbursement of the amount paid as insurance deductible with respect to the Veracel accident and other amounts not covered by insurance. Itaú and Veracel claimed that the Veracel accident was caused by failures and defects attributable to the evaporation system manufactured by Confab. Confab believes that the Veracel accident was caused by the improper handling by Veracel’s personnel of the equipment supplied by Confab in violation of Confab’s instructions. The two lawsuits were consolidated and are considered by the 6th Civil Court of São Caetano do Sul. However, each lawsuit will be adjudicated separately. On September 28, 2018, Confab and Chubb entered into a settlement agreement pursuant to which on October 9, 2018, Confab paid an amount of approximately $3.5 million to Chubb, without assuming any liability for the accident or the claim. On October 10, 2018, Confab was notified that the court had issued rulings for both lawsuits. Both decisions were unfavorable to Confab: With respect to Chubb’s claim, the court subsequently homologated the above-mentioned settlement and, accordingly, the claim was finalized. With respect to Veracel’s claim, Confab was ordered to pay the insurance deductible and other concepts not covered by insurance, currently estimated to amount to BRL 91.9 million (approximately $17.4 million) including interest, fees and expenses. Both parties filed motions for clarification against the court’s decision, which were partially granted. Although the contract between Confab and Veracel expressly provided that Confab would not be liable for damages arising from lost profits, the court award would appear to include BRL 78.8 million (approximately $15.10 million) of damages arising therefrom. Confab has additional defense arguments in respect of a claim for lost profits. On December 18, 2018, Confab filed an appeal against the first instance court decision, and on April 30, 2019, Veracel filed its response to the appeal. In June 2022, the court resolved that it lacked jurisdiction to decide on the appeal, which was re-allocat ed to another court. The parties are currently waiting for the trial of the appeal to be scheduled. At this stage the Company cannot predict the outcome of the claim or the amount or range of loss in case of an unfavorable outcome. Petrobras-related proceedings and claims The Company is aware that Brazilian, Italian and Swiss authorities investigated whether certain payments were made prior to 2014 from accounts of entities presumably associated with affiliates of the Company to accounts allegedly linked to individuals related to Petróleo Brasileiro S.A. (“Petrobras”) and whether any such payments were intended to benefit the Company’s Brazilian subsidiary Confab. Upon learning of the investigation, the Audit Committee of the Company's Board of Directors engaged external counsel in connection with the Company’s review of these matters. In addition, the Company voluntarily notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) in October 2016. The Company conducted, with the assistance of external counsel, an internal investigation and found no evidence corroborating any involvement by the Company or its directors, officers or employees in respect of improper payments. An internal investigation commissioned by Petrobras also found no evidence that Confab obtained any unfair commercial benefit or advantage from Petrobras in return for payments, including improperly obtained contracts. On June 2, 2022, the Company resolved the investigation by the SEC, and the DOJ informed that it had closed its parallel inquiry without taking action. Under the settlement with the SEC, the Company neither admits nor denies the SEC’s findings and on June 24, 2022, paid $53.1 million in disgorgement and prejudgment interest and $25 million for a civil penalty to conclude the matter. In July 2019, the Company learned that the public prosecutors’ office of Milan, Italy, had completed a preliminary investigation into the same alleged payments and had included in the investigation, among other persons, the Company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, two other board members, Gianfelice Rocca and Roberto Bonatti, and the Company’s controlling shareholder, San Faustin. The Company is not a party to the proceedings. On March 22, 2022, upon completion of the evidentiary phase of the trial, the acting prosecutor requested the first-instance court in Milan in charge of the case to impose sanctions on the Company's Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, on the other two board members, and on San Faustin. The Company’s outside counsel in Italy advised the Company that neither the case file nor the prosecutor’s request contain or identify any evidence of involvement in, or knowledge of, the alleged wrongdoing by any of the three directors. On May 26, 2022, the first-instance court dismissed the case brought by the public prosecutor against the defendants for lack of jurisdiction and stated that the criminal proceeding should not have been initiated. On October 7, 2022, the public prosecutor filed an appeal against the first-instance court’s decision. In June 2020, the Brazilian public prosecutors’ office requested the indictment of several individuals, including three executives or former executives of Confab and a former agent of Confab, charging them with the alleged crimes of corruption in relation to contracts executed between 2007 and 2010, and money laundering in relation to payments between 2009 and 2013. These criminal proceedings are underway. Neither the Company nor Confab is a party to these criminal proceedings. In addition, Petrobras and the Brazilian public prosecutors filed civil claims for damages against, among others, Confab and the Confab executives named in the criminal proceedings referred to above. Confab became aware of these civil claims in September 2022. As of December 31, 2022, the aggregate amount of these claims was estimated at BRL 284.2 million (or approximately $54.5 million). The plaintiffs also seek that Confab be prohibited from contracting with, or receiving benefits or exemptions from, the Brazilian state for an unspecified term. Confab believes these claims do not address either the defense arguments or the evidence available to the plaintiffs in Brazil and presented in other jurisdictions and is vigorously contesting them. At this stage, the Company cannot predict the outcome of these civil proceedings. Putative class actions Following the Company’s November 27, 2018, announcement that its Chairman and CEO Paolo Rocca had been included in an Argentine court investigation known as the Notebooks Case (a decision subsequently reversed by a higher court), two putative class action complaints were filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York. On April 29, 2019, the court consolidated the complaints into a single case, captioned “In re Tenaris S.A. Securities Litigation”, and appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel. On July 19, 2019, the lead plaintiffs filed an amended complaint purportedly on behalf of purchasers of Tenaris securities during the putative class period of May 1, 2014, through December 5, 2018. The individual defendants named in the complaint are Tenaris’s Chairman and CEO and Tenaris’s former CFO. The complaint alleges that during the class period, the Company and the individual defendants inflated the Tenaris share price by failing to disclose that the nationalization proceeds received by Ternium (in which the Company held an 11.46% stake) when Sidor was expropriated by Venezuela were received or expedited as a result of allegedly improper payments made to Argentine officials. The complaint does not specify the damages that plaintiff is seeking. On October 9, 2020, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendants’ motions to dismiss. The court partially granted and partially denied the motion to dismiss the claims against the Company and its Chairman and CEO. In addition, the court granted the motions to dismiss as to all claims against San Faustin, Techint, and Tenaris’s former CFO. On November 11, 2022, the parties filed a joint notice of settlement announcing a settlement in principle of all claims in the action, subject to finalizing the settlement agreements and court approval. The parties’ agreement in principle provides that, in exchange for dismissal of the action and customary releases from class members and with no admission of liability by Tenaris or Mr. Rocca, Tenaris will pay to the class $9.5 million (inclusive of legal fees to lead plaintiff’s counsel). On March 10, 2023, the lead plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the class settlement. Administrative proceeding concerning Brazilian tax credits Confab is a party to an administrative proceeding concerning the recognition and transfer of tax credits for an amount allegedly exceeding the amount that Confab would have been entitled to recognize and / or transfer. The proceeding resulted in the imposition of a fine against Confab representing approximately 75% of the allegedly undue credits, which was appealed by Confab. On January 21, 2019, Confab was notified of an administrative decision denying Confab’s appeal, thereby upholding the tax determination and the fine against Confab. On January 28, 2019, Confab challenged such administrative decision and is currently awaiting a resolution. In case of an unfavorable resolution, Confab may appeal before the courts. The estimated amount of this claim is BRL 59.2 million (approximately $11.3 million). At this stage, the Company cannot predict the outcome of this claim. U.S. patent infringement litigation Tenaris Coiled Tubes, LLC (“TCT”), a U.S. subsidiary of the Company, was sued in 2017 by its competitor Global Tubing, alleging defamatory conduct by TCT and seeking a declaration that certain Global Tubing products do not infringe patents held by TCT. TCT counterclaimed that certain Global Tubing products did infringe patents held by TCT, and Global Tubing has since sought to invalidate such patents. On December 13, 2019, Global Tubing filed an amended complaint (including the Company as defendant), alleging, among other things, that TCT and the Company had misled the patent office. On March 20, 2023, the judge granted summary judgment in favor of Global Tubing, concluding that the patents at issue are unenforceable due to inequitable conduct during the patent prosecution process. TCT and the Company are analyzing whether to appeal this judgment. Although it is not possible to predict the final outcome of this matter, the Company believes that any potential losses arising from this case will not be material. U.S. Antidumping Duty and Countervailing Duty Investigations On October 27, 2021, the U.S. Department of Commerce (“DOC”) announced the initiation of antidumping duty investigations of oil country tubular goods (“OCTG”) from Argentina, Mexico, and Russia and countervailing duty investigations of OCTG from Russia and South Korea. The investigations were initiated on the basis of a petition by U.S. Steel Tubular Products, Inc., a small number of other U.S. domestic welded OCTG producers, and a steelworkers’ union. On November 22, 2021, the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) made a preliminary determination of injury, allowing the investigations to proceed. Subsequently, the DOC issued affirmative preliminary and final antidumping determinations with respect to imports from Argentina, Mexico and Russia, and final affirmative countervailing duty determinations with respect to imports from Russia and from some Korean exporters. On October 27, 2022, the ITC determined that the imports under investigation caused injury to the U.S. OCTG industry, bringing the investigation phase to a conclusion. Tenaris and other parties have appealed the agency determinations from the investigation to the Court of International Trade. As a result of the investigation, and unless overturned on appeal, Tenaris is required to pay antidumping duty deposits (at a rate of 78.30% for imports from Argentina and 44.93% for imports from Mexico) until such time the imports are reviewed by the DOC to determine whether final duties are necessary for the specific period under review. Tenaris has been paying such deposits since May 11, 2022, reflecting the amount of such deposits in its costs. The deposit rates may be reset periodically based on the results of the review process. It is possible that, through the periodic review process, the deposits may be either returned to Tenaris in whole o r in part, or may be increased. (ii) Commitments and guarantees Set forth is a description of the Tenaris’s main outstanding commitments: Certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into a contract with Praxair S.A. for the service of oxygen and nitrogen supply. As of Dec ember 3 1, 2022, the aggregate amount to take or pay the committed volumes for an original 14-year term totaled approximately $36.4 million. A subsidiary of the Company entered into a 25-year contract (effective as of December 1, 2016, through December 1, 2041) with Techgen for the supply of 197 MW (which represents 22% of Techgen’s capacity). Monthly payments are determined on the basis of capacity charges, operation costs, back-up power charges, and transmission charges. As of the seventh contract year (as long as Techgen’s existing or replacing bank facility has been repaid in full), the Company’s subsidiary has the right to suspend or early terminate the contract if the rate payable under the agreement is higher than the rate charged by the Comisión Federal de Electricidad (“CFE”) or its successors. The Company’s subsidiary may instruct Techgen to sell to any affiliate, to CFE, or to any other third party all or any part of unused contracted energy under the agreement and the Company’s subsidiary will benefit from the proceeds of such sale. A U.S. subsidiary of the Company is a party to a contract with Nucor Steel Memphis Inc. under which it is committed to purchase on a monthly basis a specified minimum volume of steel bars, at prices subject to quarterly adjustments. The contract became effective upon delivery of the first purchase order, which occurred in April 2021, and will remain in force for a 3-year term. As of Dec ember 3 1, 2022, the estimated aggregate contract amount calculated at current prices, is approximately $85.8 million. The contract gives the subsidiary of the Company the right to temporarily reduce the quantities to be purchased thereunder to 75% of the agreed-upon minimum volume in cases of material adverse changes in prevailing economic or market conditions. In connection with the closing of the acquisition of IPSCO, a U.S. subsidiary of the Company entered into a 6-year master distribution agreement (the “MDA”) with PAO TMK (“TMK”) whereby, since January 2, 2020, Tenaris is the exclusive distributor of TMK’s OCTG and line pipe products in United States and Canada. At the end of the MDA’s 6-year term, TMK will have the option to extend the duration of its term for an additional 12-month period. Under the MDA, the Company is required to purchase specified minimum volumes of TMK-manufactured OCTG and line pipe products, based on the aggregate market demand for the relevant product category in the United States in the relevant year. In February 2022, however, the Company and TMK agreed that there shall be no minimum yearly purchase requirement for the OCTG product category for the year ending December 31, 2022, and there shall be no minimum yearly purchase requirement for TMK line pipe products under the MDA neither for the contract year ending December 31, 2022, nor for any subsequent contract year unti l expiration of the MDA’s term. A subsidiary of the Company entered into a contract with the supplier Voestalpine Grobblech GmbH from which it committed to purchase carbon steel for a remaining amount of approximately $30.2 million to use for manufacturing pipes related to the NFXP-QatarGas project. Certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into agreements with Vestas Group for the supply of materials and services related to the construction of a wind farm in Argentina. As of Dec ember 3 1, 2022, the remaining amount related to this commitment was $47.7 million. Certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into a one-year contract, renewable for one additional year, with Ternium USA, Inc., under which they are committed to purchase on a monthly basis specified minimum volumes of steel coils. The contract is effective since March 2022, with deliveries beginning in July 2022 until June 2023. As of Dec ember 3 1, 2022, the aggregate commitment totaled approximately $6.3 million. Certain subsidiaries of the Company entered into a contract with Usiminas from which they committed to purchase steel coils for a total amount of approximately $183.6 million to use for manufacturing welded pipes for the construction of the Presidente Nestor Kirchner Gas Pipeline (“GPNK”) in Argentina. A subsidiary of the Company entered into a contract with the supplier JFE Steel Corporation for the purchase tubular material, including 13 Chrome alloy products following the closure of NKK Tubes. For more information see n ote 35“Other Information –A greement to terminate NKKTubes joint venture”. In addition, Tenaris (i) applied for stand-by letters of credit as well as corporate guarantees covering certain obligations of Techgen as described i n note 13 (c), (ii) issued corporate guarantees securing certain obligations of GPC, as described in note 13 (d) and (iii) issued performance guarantees mainly related to long-term commercial contracts with several customers and parent companies for approximately $3.6 billion as of December 31, 202 2. (iii) Restrictions on the distribution of profits and payment of dividends In accordance with Luxembourg Law, the Company is required to transfer a minimum of 5% of its net profit for each financial year to a legal reserve until such reserve equals 10% of the issued share capital. As of December 31, 202 2, this reserve is fully allocated and additional allocations to the reserve are not required under Luxembourg law. Dividends may not be paid out of the legal reserve. The Company may pay dividends to the extent, among other conditions, that it has distributable retained earnings calculated in accordance with Luxembourg law and regulations.

X
- Definition The disclosure of commitments and contingent liabilities. [Refer: Contingent liabilities [member]] + References Reference 1: http://www.xbrl.org/2009/role/commonPracticeRef -Name IAS -Number 1 -IssueDate 2022-03-24 -Paragraph 10 -Subparagraph e -URI https://taxonomy.ifrs.org/xifrs-link?type=IAS&num=1&code=ifrs-tx-2022-en-r&anchor=para_10_e&doctype=Standard -URIDate 2022-03-24 + Details
Name: | ifrs-full_DisclosureOfCommitmentsAndContingentLiabilitiesExplanatory
Namespace Prefix: | ifrs-full_
Data Type: | dtr-types:textBlockItemType
Balance Type: | na
Period Type: | duration

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