Item 1. Business.
Overview
We design, develop and market analog and mixed-signal integrated circuits (ICs) and other electronic components and circuitry used in high-voltage power conversion. Our products are used in power converters that convert electricity from a high-voltage source (typically 48 volts or higher) to the type of power required for a specified downstream use. In most cases, this conversion entails, among other functions, converting alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) or vice versa, reducing or increasing the voltage, and regulating the output voltage and/or current according to the customer’s specifications.
A large percentage of our products are ICs used in AC-DC power supplies, which convert the high-voltage AC from a wall outlet to the low-voltage DC required by most electronic devices. Power supplies incorporating our products are used with all manner of electronic products including mobile phones, computing and networking equipment, appliances, electronic utility meters, power tools, industrial controls, and lighting applications that utilize light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and “smart-home,” or “internet of things” applications such as networked thermostats, power strips and other building-automation and security devices.
We also offer high-voltage gate drivers - either standalone ICs or circuit boards containing ICs, electrical isolation components and other circuitry - used to operate high-voltage switches such as insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs). These combinations of switches and drivers are used for power conversion in high-power applications (i.e., power levels ranging from a few kilowatts up to one gigawatt) such as industrial motors, solar- and wind-power systems, electric vehicles and high-voltage DC transmission systems.
Our products bring a number of important benefits to the power-conversion market compared with less advanced alternatives, including reduced component count and design complexity, smaller size, higher reliability and reduced time-to-market. Our products also improve the energy efficiency of power converters, helping our customers meet the increasingly stringent efficiency standards that have been adopted around the world for many electronic products, and improving the efficacy of renewable-energy systems, electric vehicles and other high-power applications.
While the size of our addressable market fluctuates with changes in macroeconomic and industry conditions, the market has generally exhibited a modest growth rate over time as growth in the unit volume of power converters has been offset to a large degree by reductions in the average selling price of components in this market. Therefore, the growth of our business depends largely on increasing our penetration of the markets, that we serve and on further expanding our addressable market. Our growth strategy includes the following elements:
•
Increase our penetration of the markets we serve. We currently address AC-DC power-supply applications with power outputs up to approximately 500 watts, and gate-driver applications of ten kilowatts and higher. Through our R&D efforts, we seek to introduce more advanced products for this market that offer higher levels of integration and performance compared to earlier products. We also continue to expand our sales and application-engineering staff and our network of distributors, as well as our offerings of technical documentation and design-support tools and services to help customers use our products. These tools and services include our PI Expert™ design software, which we offer free of charge, and our transformer-sample service.
Our market-penetration strategy also includes capitalizing on the importance of energy efficiency in the power conversion market. For example, our EcoSmart™ technology drastically reduces the amount of energy consumed by electronic products when they are not in use, helping our customers comply with regulations that seek to curb this so-called “standby” energy consumption. Also, our gate-driver products are critical components in energy-efficient DC motor drives, high-voltage DC transmission systems, renewable-energy installations and electric transportation applications.
•
Increase the size of our addressable market. Prior to 2010 our addressable market consisted of AC-DC applications with up to about 50 watts of output, a served available market (“SAM”) opportunity of approximately $1.5 billion. Since that time we have expanded our SAM to approximately $3 billion through a variety of means. These include the introduction of products that enable us to address higher-power AC-DC applications (such as our Hiper™ product families, which address applications up to about 500 watts) and our entry into the gate-driver markets through the acquisition of CT-Concept Technologie AG in 2012. In 2016 we introduced the SCALE-iDriverTM family of gate-driver ICs, which enables us to address applications between approximately 10 kilowatts and 100 kilowatts, whereas previously our gate-driver products were primarily for applications above 100 kilowatts.
Also contributing to our SAM expansion has been the emergence of new applications within the power ranges that our products can address. For example, applications such as LED lighting, “smart” utility meters, battery-powered lawn equipment and bicycles, and USB power ports (installed alongside traditional AC wall outlets) can incorporate our products; the increased use of electronic intelligence and controls in consumer appliances has also enhanced our SAM. Finally, we have enhanced our SAM by increasing the level of integration of our products, which in turn increases their value. For example, our InnoSwitch™ ICs integrate circuitry from the secondary, or low-voltage, side of AC-DC power supplies, whereas earlier product families integrated circuitry only on the primary, or high-voltage side.
We intend to continue expanding our SAM in the years ahead through all of the means described above.
Industry Background
Virtually every electronic device that plugs into a wall socket requires a power supply to convert the high-voltage alternating current provided by electric utilities into the low-voltage direct current required by most electronic devices. A power supply may be located inside a device, such as a consumer appliance or flat-panel TV, or it may be outside the device as in the case of a mobile-phone charger or an adapter for a cordless phone or cable modem.
Until approximately 1970, AC-DC power supplies were generally in the form of line-frequency, or linear, transformers. These devices, consisting primarily of copper wire wound around an iron core, tend to be bulky and heavy, and typically waste a substantial amount of electricity. In the 1970s, the availability of high-voltage discrete semiconductors enabled the development of a new generation of power supplies known as switched-mode power supplies, or switchers. These switchers generally came to be cost-effective alternatives to linear transformers in applications requiring more than a few watts of power; in recent years the use of linear transformers has declined even further as a result of energy-efficiency standards and higher raw-material prices.
Switchers are generally smaller, lighter-weight and more energy-efficient than linear transformers. However, switchers designed with discrete components are highly complex, containing numerous components and requiring a high level of analog design expertise. Further, the complexity and high component count of discrete switchers make them relatively costly, difficult to manufacture and prone to failures. Also, some discrete switchers lack protection and energy-efficiency features; adding these features may further increase the component count, cost and complexity of the power supply.
In high-power systems such as industrial motor drives, electric locomotives and renewable-energy systems, power conversion is typically performed using arrays of high-power silicon transistors known as IGBT modules; these modules are operated by electronic circuitry known as gate drivers (or IGBT drivers), whose function is to ensure accurate, safe and reliable operation of the IGBT modules. Much like discrete power supplies, discrete gate drivers tend to be highly complex, requiring a large number of components and a great deal of design expertise.
Our Highly Integrated Approach
In 1994 we introduced TOPSwitch, the industry’s first cost-effective high-voltage IC for switched-mode AC-DC power supplies; we have since introduced a range of other product families such as TinySwitch, LinkSwitch, Hiper and InnoSwitch which have expanded the range of power-supply applications we can address. In 2012 we expanded our addressable market to include high-voltage gate drivers.
Our ICs and gate drivers drastically reduce the complexity and component count of power converters compared to typical discrete designs by integrating many of the functions otherwise performed by numerous discrete electronic components, and by eliminating (or reducing the size and cost of) additional components through innovative system design. As a result, our products enable power converters to have superior features and functionality at a total cost equal to or lower than that of many competing alternatives. Our products offer the following key benefits:
•
Fewer Components, Reduced Size and Higher Reliability
Our highly integrated ICs and gate drivers enable designs with up to 70% fewer components than comparable discrete designs. This reduction in component count enhances reliability and efficiency, reduces size, accelerates time-to-market and results in lower manufacturing costs for our customers. Power supplies that incorporate our ICs are also lighter and more portable than comparable power supplies built with linear transformers, which are still used in some low-power applications.
•
Reduced Time-to-Market, Enhanced Manufacturability
Because our products eliminate much of the complexity associated with the design of power converters, designs can typically be completed in much less time, resulting in more efficient use of our customers’ design resources and shorter time-to-market for new designs. The lower component count and reduced complexity enabled by our products also makes designs more suitable for high-volume manufacturing. We also provide extensive hands-on design support as well as online design tools, such as our PI Expert design software, that further reduce time-to-market and product development risks.
•
Energy Efficiency
Our patented EcoSmart technology, introduced in 1998, improves the energy efficiency of electronic devices during normal operation as well as standby and “no-load” conditions. This technology enables manufacturers to cost-effectively meet the growing demand for energy-efficient products, and to comply with increasingly stringent energy-efficiency requirements. Our gate drivers also enable very high efficiency in high-power systems; in many such systems, such as renewable-energy installations, even small efficiency gains can dramatically shorten the payback period over which the cost of a system is recovered through energy savings.
•
Wide Power Range and Scalability
Products in our current IC families can address AC-DC power supplies with output power up to approximately 500 watts as well as some high-voltage DC-DC applications; our high-voltage gate drivers are used in applications with power levels as high as one gigawatt. Within each of our product families, designers can scale up or down in power to address a wide range of designs with minimal design effort.
Energy Efficiency
Power supplies often draw significantly more electricity than the amount needed by the devices they power. As a result, billions of dollars’ worth of electricity is wasted each year, and millions of tons of greenhouse gases are unnecessarily produced by power plants. Energy waste occurs during the normal operation of a device and in standby mode, when the device is plugged in but idle. For example: computers and printers waste energy while in “sleep” mode; TVs that are turned off by remote control consume energy while awaiting a remote-control signal to turn them back on; a mobile-phone charger left plugged into a wall outlet continues to draw electricity even when not connected to the phone (a condition known as “no-load”); and many common household appliances, such as microwave ovens, dishwashers and washing machines, also consume power when not in use. In fact, a 2015 study by the National Resources Defense Council found that devices that are “always-on” but inactive may be causing as much as $19 billion in annual energy waste in the U.S. alone.
Lighting is another major source of energy waste. Less than 5% of the energy consumed by traditional incandescent light bulbs is converted to light, while the remainder is wasted as heat. The Alliance to Save Energy has estimated that a conversion to efficient lighting technologies such as compact fluorescent bulbs and LEDs could save as much as $18 billion worth of electricity and 158 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions per year in the United States alone.
In response to concerns about the environmental impact of carbon emissions, policymakers are taking action to promote energy efficiency. For example, the ENERGY STAR® program and the European Union Code of Conduct encourage manufacturers of electronic devices to comply with voluntary energy-efficiency specifications. In 2007 the California Energy Commission (CEC) implemented mandatory efficiency standards for external power supplies. The CEC standards were implemented nationwide in the United States in July 2008 as a result of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA); these federal standards were tightened in 2016. Similar standards for external power supplies took effect in the European Union in 2010 as part of the EU’s EcoDesign Directive for Energy-Related Products.
In 2009 the CEC announced mandatory efficiency standards for televisions, which took effect in 2011, and in January 2012 the CEC announced mandatory efficiency standards for battery-charging systems, which took effect in 2013.
In 2010, the EU EcoDesign Directive implemented standards limiting standby power consumption on a wide range of electronic products; the limit was reduced by 50 percent beginning in 2013, with many products now limited to 500 milliwatts of standby usage. The EISA legislation also required substantial improvements in the efficiency of lighting technologies beginning in 2012; as of 2014, traditional 100-, 75-, 60- and 40-watt bulbs may no longer be manufactured or sold in the United States. Plans to eliminate conventional incandescent bulbs have also been announced or enacted in other geographies such as Canada, Australia and Europe.
We believe we offer products that enable manufacturers to meet or exceed these regulations, and all other such regulations of which we are aware. Our EcoSmart technology, introduced in 1998, dramatically reduces waste in both operating and standby modes; we estimate that this technology has saved billions of dollars’ worth of standby power worldwide since 1998. In 2010 we introduced our CapZero and SenZero IC families, which eliminate additional sources of standby waste in some power supplies; we have also introduced a range of product families designed specifically for LED-lighting applications.
Products
Below is a brief description of our products:
•
AC-DC power conversion products
TOPSwitch, our first commercially successful product family, was introduced in 1994. Since that time we have introduced a wide range of products (such as our TinySwitch, LinkSwitch and Hiper families) to increase the level of integration and improve upon the functionality of the original TOPSwitch, and to broaden the range of power levels we can address. In 2010 we introduced
our CapZero and SenZero families, which reduce standby power consumption in certain applications by eliminating waste caused by so-called bleed resistors and sense resistors. We also offer a range of high-performance, high-voltage diodes known as Qspeed diodes.
In 2014 we introduced our InnoSwitch product family, the first-ever power-supply ICs to combine primary, secondary and feedback circuits into a single package. These ICs employ a proprietary technology known as FluxLink to enable precise control without the need for optical components, which tend to add cost and diminish the reliability of power supplies.
In January 2015 we further expanded our product portfolio with the acquisition of Cambridge Semiconductor Ltd., a producer of controller ICs for low-power AC-DC applications. Since 2010 we have also introduced products designed specifically for LED-lighting applications, including our LYTSwitch family.
This portfolio of power-conversion products generally addresses power supplies ranging from less than one watt of output up to approximately 500 watts of output, a market we refer to as the “low-power” market. This market consists of an extremely broad range of applications including mobile-device chargers, consumer appliances, utility meters, LCD monitors, main and standby power supplies for desktop computers and TVs, LED lamps, and numerous other consumer and industrial applications.
•
High-voltage gate drivers
We offer a range of high-voltage gate-driver products sold primarily under the SCALE and SCALE-2 product-family names. These products are fully assembled circuit boards incorporating multiple ICs, electrical isolation components and other circuitry. We offer both ready-to-operate “plug-and-play” drivers designed specifically for use with particular IGBT modules, as well as “driver cores,” which provide more basic driver functionality that customers can customize to their own specifications after purchase. In May 2016 we introduced the SCALE-iDriver family of standalone ICs, which enables us to address applications between approximately 10 kilowatts and 100 kilowatts, whereas previously our sales of high-power products were primarily for applications above 100 kilowatts.
•
High-voltage DC-DC products
The DPA-Switch family of products, introduced in June 2002, was the first monolithic high-voltage DC-DC power conversion IC designed specifically for use in distributed power architectures. Applications include power-over-Ethernet powered devices such as voice-over-IP phones and security cameras, as well as network hubs, line cards, servers, digital PBX phones, DC-DC converter modules and industrial controls.
Other Product Information
TOPSwitch, TinySwitch, LinkSwitch, DPA-Switch, EcoSmart, Hiper, Qspeed, InnoSwitch, SCALE, SCALE-II, SCALE-III, SCALE-iDriver, PeakSwitch, CAPZero, SENZero, ChiPhy, FluxLink, CONCEPT and PI Expert are trademarks of Power Integrations, Inc.
End Markets and Applications
Our net revenues consist primarily of sales of the products described above. When evaluating our net revenues, we categorize our sales into the following four major end-market groupings: communications, computer, consumer, and industrial.
The table below provides the approximate mix of our net sales by end market:
Our products are used in a vast range of power-conversion applications in the above-listed end-market categories. The following chart lists the most prominent applications for our products in each category.
Sales, Distribution and Marketing
We sell our products to original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, and merchant power-supply manufacturers through our direct sales staff and a worldwide network of independent sales representatives and distributors. We have sales offices in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, India, China, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Singapore and Taiwan. Direct sales to OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers represented approximately 23%, 25% and 24% of our net product revenues in 2017, 2016 and 2015, while sales to distributors accounted for the remainder in each of the corresponding years. Most of our distributors are entitled to return privileges based on revenues and are protected from price reductions affecting their inventories. Our distributors are not subject to minimum purchase requirements, and sales representatives and distributors can discontinue marketing our products at any time.
Our top ten customers, including distributors that resell to OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers, accounted for approximately 54%, 60% and 61% of net revenues in 2017, 2016, and 2015, respectively.
The following customers, both distributors, accounted for 10% or more of total net revenues in 2017, 2016 and 2015:
_______________
* Total customer revenue was less than 10% of net revenues
No other customers accounted for more than 10% of net revenues in these periods.
Sales to customers outside of the United States accounted for approximately 96% of our net revenues in each of 2017, 2016 and 2015, with sales to customers within the United States accounting for the remainder in each of the corresponding years. See Note 8, “Significant Customers and Geographic Net Revenues,” in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K regarding sales to customers located in foreign countries. See our consolidated financial statements in Item 8 regarding total revenues and profits for the last three fiscal years, and total assets.
We are subject to risks stemming from the fact that most of our manufacturing and most of our customers are located in foreign jurisdictions. Risks related to our foreign operations are set forth in Item 1A
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
In addition to the other information in this report, the following factors should be considered carefully in evaluating our business before purchasing shares of our stock.
Our operating results are volatile and difficult to predict. If we fail to meet the expectations of public market analysts or investors, the market price of our common stock may decrease significantly. Our net revenues and operating results have varied significantly in the past, are difficult to forecast, are subject to numerous factors both within and outside of our control, and may fluctuate significantly in the future. As a result, our operating results could fall below the expectations of public market analysts or investors. If that occurs, the price of our stock may decline.
Some of the factors that could affect our operating results include the following:
•
the demand for our products declining in the major end markets we serve, which may occur due to competitive factors, supply-chain fluctuations or changes in macroeconomic conditions;
•
our products are sold through distributors, which limits our direct interaction with our end customers, which reduces our ability to forecast sales and increases the complexity of our business;
•
the volume and timing of delivery of orders placed by us with our wafer foundries and assembly subcontractors, and their ability to procure materials;
•
competitive pressures on selling prices;
•
the ability of our products to penetrate additional markets;
•
the volume and timing of orders received from customers;
•
the inability to adequately protect or enforce our intellectual property rights;
•
reliance on international sales activities for a substantial portion of our net revenues;
•
fluctuations in exchange rates, particularly the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen, the Euro and the Swiss franc;
•
expenses we are required to incur (or choose to incur) in connection with our intellectual property litigations;
•
our ability to develop and bring to market new products and technologies on a timely basis;
•
earthquakes, terrorists acts or other disasters;
•
continued impact of changes in securities laws and regulations, including potential risks resulting from our evaluation of our internal controls over financial reporting;
•
the lengthy timing of our sales cycle;
•
undetected defects and failures in meeting the exact specifications required by our products;
•
changes in tax rules and regulations, changes in interpretation of tax rules and regulations, or unfavorable assessments from tax audits may increase the amount of taxes we are required to pay;
•
our ability to attract and retain qualified personnel;
•
risks associated with acquisitions and strategic investments;
•
our ability to successfully integrate, or realize the expected benefits from, our acquisitions;
•
changes in environmental laws and regulations, including with respect to energy consumption and climate change;
•
interruptions in our information technology systems; and
•
uncertainties arising out of economic consequences of current and potential military actions or terrorist activities and associated political instability.
If demand for our products declines in our major end markets, our net revenues will decrease. A limited number of applications of our products, such as cellphone chargers, LED lights, desktop PCs and consumer appliances make up a significant percentage of our net revenues. We expect that a significant level of our net revenues and operating results will continue to be dependent upon
these applications in the near term. The demand for these products has been highly cyclical and has been impacted by economic downturns in the past. Any economic slowdown in the end markets that we serve could cause a slowdown in demand for our ICs. When our customers are not successful in maintaining high levels of demand for their products, their demand for our ICs decreases, which adversely affects our operating results. Any significant downturn in demand in these markets would cause our net revenues to decline and could cause the price of our stock to fall.
Our products are sold through distributors, which limits our direct interaction with our end customers, therefore reducing our ability to forecast sales and increasing the complexity of our business. Sales to distributors accounted for approximately 77%, 75% and 76% of net revenues in the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Selling through distributors reduces our ability to forecast sales and increases the complexity of our business, requiring us to:
•
manage a more complex supply chain;
•
monitor the level of inventory of our products at each distributor, and
•
monitor the financial condition and credit-worthiness of our distributors, many of which are located outside of the United States and are not publicly traded.
Since we have limited ability to forecast inventory levels at our end customers, it is possible that there may be significant build-up of inventories in the distributor channel, with the OEM or the OEM’s contract manufacturer. Such a buildup could result in a slowdown in orders, requests for returns from customers, or requests to move out planned shipments. This could adversely impact our revenues and profits. Any failure to manage these complexities could disrupt or reduce sales of our products and unfavorably impact our financial results.
We depend on third-party suppliers to provide us with wafers for our products and if they fail to provide us sufficient quantities of wafers, our business may suffer. Our primary supply arrangements for the production of wafers are with Epson, Lapis, and X-FAB. Our contracts with these suppliers expire on varying dates, with the earliest to expire in December 2020. Although some aspects of our relationships with Lapis, X-FAB and Epson are contractual, many important aspects of these relationships depend on their continued cooperation. We cannot assure that we will continue to work successfully with Epson, Lapis and X-FAB in the future, and that the wafer foundries’ capacity will meet our needs. Additionally, one or more of these wafer foundries could seek an early termination of our wafer supply agreements. Any serious disruption in the supply of wafers from Epson, Lapis and X-FAB could harm our business. We estimate that it would take 12 to 24 months from the time we identified an alternate manufacturing source to produce wafers with acceptable manufacturing yields in sufficient quantities to meet our needs.
Although we provide our foundries with rolling forecasts of our production requirements, their ability to provide wafers to us is ultimately limited by the available capacity of the wafer foundry. Any reduction in wafer foundry capacity available to us could require us to pay amounts in excess of contracted or anticipated amounts for wafer deliveries or require us to make other concessions to meet our customers’ requirements, or may limit our ability to meet demand for our products. Further, to the extent demand for our products exceeds wafer foundry capacity, this could inhibit us from expanding our business and harm relationships with our customers. Any of these concessions or limitations could harm our business.
If our third-party suppliers and independent subcontractors do not produce our wafers and assemble our finished products at acceptable yields, our net revenues may decline. We depend on independent foundries to produce wafers, and independent subcontractors to assemble and test finished products, at acceptable yields and to deliver them to us in a timely manner. The failure of the foundries to supply us wafers at acceptable yields could prevent us from selling our products to our customers and would likely cause a decline in our net revenues and gross margin. In addition, our IC assembly process requires our manufacturers to use a high-voltage molding compound that has been available from only a few suppliers. These compounds and their specified processing conditions require a more exacting level of process control than normally required for standard IC packages. Unavailability of assembly materials or problems with the assembly process can materially and adversely affect yields, timely delivery and cost to manufacture. We may not be able to maintain acceptable yields in the future.
In addition, if prices for commodities used in our products increase significantly, raw material costs would increase for our suppliers which could result in an increase in the prices our suppliers charge us. To the extent we are not able to pass these costs on to our customers; this would have an adverse effect on our gross margins.
Intense competition in the high-voltage power supply industry may lead to a decrease in our average selling price and reduced sales volume of our products. The high-voltage power supply industry is intensely competitive and characterized by significant price sensitivity. Our products face competition from alternative technologies, such as linear transformers, discrete switcher power supplies, and other integrated and hybrid solutions. If the price of competing solutions decreases significantly, the cost effectiveness of our products will be adversely affected. If power requirements for applications in which our products are currently utilized go outside the cost-effective range of our products, some of these alternative technologies can be used more cost effectively. In addition, as our patents expire, our competitors could legally begin using the technology covered by the expired patents in their products, potentially increasing the performance of their products and/or decreasing the cost of their products, which may enable our competitors
to compete more effectively. Our current patents may or may not inhibit our competitors from getting any benefit from an expired patent. Our U.S. patents have expiration dates ranging from 2018 to 2037. We cannot assure that our products will continue to compete favorably or that we will be successful in the face of increasing competition from new products and enhancements introduced by existing competitors or new companies entering this market. We believe our failure to compete successfully in the high-voltage power supply business, including our ability to introduce new products with higher average selling prices, would materially harm our operating results.
If our products do not penetrate additional markets, our business will not grow as we expect. We believe that our future success depends in part upon our ability to penetrate additional markets for our products. We cannot assure that we will be able to overcome the marketing or technological challenges necessary to penetrate additional markets. To the extent that a competitor penetrates additional markets before we do, or takes market share from us in our existing markets, our net revenues and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.
We do not have long-term contracts with any of our customers and if they fail to place, or if they cancel or reschedule orders for our products, our operating results and our business may suffer. Our business is characterized by short-term customer orders and shipment schedules, and the ordering patterns of some of our large customers have been unpredictable in the past and will likely remain unpredictable in the future. Not only does the volume of units ordered by particular customers vary substantially from period to period, but also purchase orders received from particular customers often vary substantially from early oral estimates provided by those customers for planning purposes. In addition, customer orders can be canceled or rescheduled without significant penalty to the customer. In the past, we have experienced customer cancellations of substantial orders for reasons beyond our control, and significant cancellations could occur again at any time. Also, a relatively small number of distributors, OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers account for a significant portion of our revenues. Specifically, our top ten customers, including distributors, accounted for 54% and 60% of our net revenues in each of the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, respectively. However, a significant portion of these revenues are attributable to sales of our products through distributors of electronic components. These distributors sell our products to a broad, diverse range of end users, including OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers, which mitigates the risk of customer concentration to a large degree.
If we are unable to adequately protect or enforce our intellectual property rights, we could lose market share, incur costly litigation expenses, suffer incremental price erosion or lose valuable assets, any of which could harm our operations and negatively impact our profitability. Our success depends upon our ability to continue our technological innovation and protect our intellectual property, including patents, trade secrets, copyrights and know-how. We are currently engaged in litigation to enforce our intellectual property rights, and associated expenses have been, and are expected to remain, material and have adversely affected our operating results. We cannot assure that the steps we have taken to protect our intellectual property will be adequate to prevent misappropriation, or that others will not develop competitive technologies or products. From time to time, we have received, and we may receive in the future, communications alleging possible infringement of patents or other intellectual property rights of others. Costly litigation may be necessary to enforce our intellectual property rights or to defend us against claimed infringement. The failure to obtain necessary licenses and other rights, and/or litigation arising out of infringement claims could cause us to lose market share and harm our business.
As our patents expire, we will lose intellectual property protection previously afforded by those patents. Additionally, the laws of some foreign countries in which our technology is or may in the future be licensed may not protect our intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States, thus limiting the protections applicable to our technology.
Our international sales activities account for a substantial portion of our net revenues, which subjects us to substantial risks. Sales to customers outside of the United States of America account for, and have accounted for a large portion of our net revenues, including approximately 96% of our net revenues for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, and 2016. If our international sales declined and we were unable to increase domestic sales, our revenues would decline and our operating results would be harmed. International sales involve a number of risks to us, including:
•
potential insolvency of international distributors and representatives;
•
reduced protection for intellectual property rights in some countries;
•
the impact of recessionary environments in economies outside the United States;
•
tariffs and other trade barriers and restrictions;
•
the burdens of complying with a variety of foreign and applicable U.S. Federal and state laws; and
•
foreign-currency exchange risk.
Our failure to adequately address these risks could reduce our international sales and materially and adversely affect our operating results. Furthermore, because substantially all of our foreign sales are denominated in U.S. dollars, increases in the value
of the dollar cause the price of our products in foreign markets to rise, making our products more expensive relative to competing products priced in local currencies.
Fluctuations in exchange rates, particularly the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen, Swiss franc and euro, may impact our gross margin and net income. Our exchange rate risk related to the Japanese yen includes two of our major suppliers, Epson and Lapis, with which we have wafer supply agreements based in U.S. dollars; however, these agreements also allow for mutual sharing of the impact of the exchange rate fluctuation between Japanese yen and the U.S. dollar. Each year, our management and these suppliers review and negotiate pricing; the negotiated pricing is denominated in U.S. dollars but is subject to contractual exchange rate provisions. The fluctuation in the exchange rate is shared equally between Power Integrations and each of these suppliers. We maintain cash denominated in Swiss francs and euros to fund the operations of our Swiss subsidiary. The functional currency of our Swiss subsidiary is the U.S. dollar; gains and losses arising from the re-measurement of non-functional currency balances are recorded in other income in our consolidated statements of income, and material unfavorable exchange-rate fluctuations with the Swiss franc could negatively impact our net income.
If we do not prevail in our litigation, we will have expended significant financial resources, potentially without any benefit, and may also suffer the loss of rights to use some technologies. We are currently involved in a number of patent litigation matters and the outcome of the litigation is uncertain. See Note 13, Legal Proceedings and Contingencies, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. For example, in one of our patent suits the infringing company has been found to infringe four of our patents. Despite the favorable court finding, the infringing party filed an appeal to the damages awarded. In another matter, we are being sued in an ongoing case for patent infringement. Should we ultimately be determined to be infringing another party’s patents, or if an injunction is issued against us while litigation is pending on those claims, such result could have an adverse impact on our ability to sell products found to be infringing, either directly or indirectly. In the event of an adverse outcome, we may be required to pay substantial damages, stop our manufacture, use, sale, or importation of infringing products, or obtain licenses to the intellectual property we are found to have infringed. We have also incurred, and expect to continue to incur, significant legal costs in conducting these lawsuits, including the appeal of the case we won, and our involvement in this litigation and any future intellectual property litigation could adversely affect sales and divert the efforts and attention of our technical and management personnel, whether or not such litigation is resolved in our favor. Thus, even if we are successful in these lawsuits, the benefits of this success may fail to outweigh the significant legal costs we will have incurred.
If our efforts to enhance existing products and introduce new products are not successful, we may not be able to generate demand for our products. Our success depends in significant part upon our ability to develop new ICs for high-voltage power conversion for existing and new markets, to introduce these products in a timely manner and to have these products selected for design into products of leading manufacturers. New product introduction schedules are subject to the risks and uncertainties that typically accompany development and delivery of complex technologies to the market place, including product development delays and defects. If we fail to develop and sell new products in a timely manner then our net revenues could decline.
In addition, we cannot be sure that we will be able to adjust to changing market demands as quickly and cost-effectively as necessary to compete successfully. Furthermore, we cannot assure that we will be able to introduce new products in a timely and cost-effective manner or in sufficient quantities to meet customer demand or that these products will achieve market acceptance. Our failure, or our customers’ failure, to develop and introduce new products successfully and in a timely manner would harm our business. In addition, customers may defer or return orders for existing products in response to the introduction of new products. When a potential liability exists we will maintain reserves for customer returns, however we cannot assure that these reserves will be adequate.
In the event of an earthquake, terrorist act or other disaster, our operations may be interrupted and our business would be harmed. Our principal executive offices and operating facilities are situated near San Francisco, California, and most of our major suppliers, which are wafer foundries and assembly houses, are located in areas that have been subject to severe earthquakes, such as Japan. Many of our suppliers are also susceptible to other disasters such as tropical storms, typhoons or tsunamis. In the event of a disaster, such as the earthquake and tsunami in Japan, we or one or more of our major suppliers may be temporarily unable to continue operations and may suffer significant property damage. Any interruption in our ability or that of our major suppliers to continue operations could delay the development and shipment of our products and have a substantial negative impact on our financial results.
Securities laws and regulations, including potential risk resulting from our evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting, will continue to impact our results. Complying with the requirements of the federal securities laws and NASDAQ’s conditions for continued listing have imposed significant legal and financial compliance costs, and are expected to continue to impose significant costs and management burden on us. These rules and regulations also may make it more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance, and we may be required to accept reduced coverage or incur substantially higher costs to obtain coverage. These rules and regulations could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified executive officers and members of our board of directors, particularly qualified members to serve on our audit committee. Further, the rules and regulations
under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, which became effective in 2011, may impose significant costs and management burden on us.
Additionally, because these laws, regulations and standards are expected to be subject to varying interpretations, their application in practice may evolve over time as new guidance becomes available. This evolution may result in continuing uncertainty regarding compliance matters and additional costs necessitated by ongoing revisions to our disclosure and governance practices.
Because the sales cycle for our products can be lengthy, we may incur substantial expenses before we generate significant revenues, if any. Our products are generally incorporated into a customer’s products at the design stage. However, customer decisions to use our products, commonly referred to as design wins, can often require us to expend significant research and development and sales and marketing resources without any assurance of success. These significant research and development and sales and marketing resources often precede volume sales, if any, by a year or more. The value of any design win will largely depend upon the commercial success of the customer’s product. We cannot assure that we will continue to achieve design wins or that any design win will result in future revenues. If a customer decides at the design stage not to incorporate our products into its product, we may not have another opportunity for a design win with respect to that product for many months or years.
Our products must meet exacting specifications, and undetected defects and failures may occur which may cause customers to return or stop buying our products. Our customers generally establish demanding specifications for quality, performance and reliability, and our products must meet these specifications. ICs as complex as those we sell often encounter development delays and may contain undetected defects or failures when first introduced or after commencement of commercial shipments. We have from time to time in the past experienced product quality, performance or reliability problems. If defects and failures occur in our products, we could experience lost revenue, increased costs, including warranty expense and costs associated with customer support and customer expenses, delays in or cancellations or rescheduling of orders or shipments and product returns or discounts, any of which would harm our operating results.
Changes in tax rules and regulations, changes in interpretation of tax rules and regulations, or unfavorable assessments from tax audits may increase the amount of taxes we are required to pay. Our operations are subject to income and transaction taxes in the United States and in multiple foreign jurisdictions and to review or audit by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and state, local and foreign tax authorities. In addition, the United States, countries in Asia and other countries where we do business have recently enacted or are considering changes in relevant tax, accounting and other laws, regulations and interpretations, including changes to tax laws applicable to multinational companies. These potential changes could adversely affect our effective tax rates or result in other costs to us.
Recently enacted U.S. tax legislation will significantly change the taxation of U.S.-based multinational corporations, by, among other things, reducing the U.S. corporate income tax rate, adopting elements of a territorial tax system, assessing a one-time transition tax on earnings of certain foreign subsidiaries that were previously tax deferred, and the creation of new taxes on certain foreign-sourced earnings. The legislation is unclear in some respects and will require interpretations and implementing regulations by the Internal Revenue Service, as well as state tax authorities, and the legislation could be subject to potential amendments and technical corrections, any of which could lessen or increase certain adverse impacts of the legislation. A significant portion of our earnings are earned by our subsidiaries outside the U.S. Changes to the taxation of certain foreign earnings resulting from the newly enacted U.S. tax legislation, along with the state tax impact of these changes and potential future cash distributions, may have an adverse effect on our effective tax rate. Furthermore, changes to the taxation of undistributed foreign earnings could change our future intentions regarding reinvestment of such earnings. The foregoing items could have a material effect on our business, cash flow, results of operations or financial conditions.
We must attract and retain qualified personnel to be successful and competition for qualified personnel is intense in our market. Our success depends to a significant extent upon the continued service of our executive officers and other key management and technical personnel, and on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel, such as experienced analog design engineers and systems applications engineers. The competition for these employees is intense, particularly in Silicon Valley. The loss of the services of one or more of our engineers, executive officers or other key personnel could harm our business. In addition, if one or more of these individuals leaves our employ, and we are unable to quickly and efficiently replace those individuals with qualified personnel who can smoothly transition into their new roles, our business may suffer. We do not have long-term employment contracts with, and we do not have in place key person life insurance policies on, any of our employees.
We are exposed to risks associated with acquisitions and strategic investments. We have made, and in the future intend to make, acquisitions of, and investments in, companies, technologies or products in existing, related or new markets. Acquisitions involve numerous risks, including but not limited to:
•
inability to realize anticipated benefits, which may occur due to any of the reasons described below, or for other unanticipated reasons
•
the risk of litigation or disputes with customers, suppliers, partners or stockholders of an acquisition target arising from a proposed or completed transaction;
•
impairment of acquired intangible assets and goodwill as a result of changing business conditions, technological advancements or worse-than-expected performance, which would adversely affect our financial results; and
•
unknown, underestimated and/or undisclosed commitments, liabilities or issues not discovered in our due diligence of such transactions.
We also in the future may have strategic relationships with other companies, which may decline in value and/or not meet desired objectives. The success of these strategic relationships depends on various factors over which we may have limited or no control and requires ongoing and effective cooperation with strategic partners. Moreover, these relationships are often illiquid, such that it may be difficult or impossible for us to monetize such relationships.
Our inability to successfully integrate, or realize the expected benefits from, our acquisitions could adversely affect our results. We have made, and in the future intend to make, acquisitions of other businesses and with these acquisitions there is a risk that integration difficulties may cause us not to realize expected benefits. The success of the acquisitions could depend, in part, on our ability to realize the anticipated benefits and cost savings (if any) from combining the businesses of the acquired companies and our business, which may take longer to realize than expected.
Changes in environmental laws and regulations may increase our costs related to obsolete products in our existing inventory. Changing environmental regulations and the timetable to implement them continue to impact our customers’ demand for our products. As a result there could be an increase in our inventory obsolescence costs for products manufactured prior to our customers’ adoption of new regulations. Currently we have limited visibility into our customers’ strategies to implement these changing environmental regulations into their business. The inability to accurately determine our customers’ strategies could increase our inventory costs related to obsolescence.
Interruptions in our information technology systems could adversely affect our business. We rely on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of complex information technology systems and networks to operate our business. Any significant system or network disruption, including but not limited to new system implementations, computer viruses, security breaches, or energy blackouts could have a material adverse impact on our operations, sales and operating results. We have implemented measures to manage our risks related to such disruptions, but such disruptions could still occur and negatively impact our operations and financial results. In addition, we may incur additional costs to remedy any damages caused by these disruptions or security breaches.
Uncertainties arising out of economic consequences of current and potential military actions or terrorist activities and associated political instability could adversely affect our business. Like other U.S. companies, our business and operating results are subject to uncertainties arising out of economic consequences of current and potential military actions or terrorist activities and associated political instability, and the impact of heightened security concerns on domestic and international travel and commerce. These uncertainties could also lead to delays or cancellations of customer orders, a general decrease in corporate spending or our inability to effectively market and sell our products. Any of these results could substantially harm our business and results of operations, causing a decrease in our revenues.
Item 1B.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.
Not applicable.
Item 2.
Item 2. Properties.
We own our principal executive, administrative, manufacturing and technical offices which are located in San Jose, California. We also own an R&D facility in New Jersey and a test facility in Biel, Switzerland. We lease administrative office space in Singapore and Switzerland, R&D facilities in Canada, United Kingdom and Malaysia and a design center in Germany, in addition to sales offices in various countries around the world to accommodate our sales force. We believe that our current facilities are sufficient for our Company; however, if headcount increases above capacity we may need to lease additional space.
Item 3.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings.
Information with respect to this item may be found in Note 13, Legal Proceedings and Contingencies, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included later in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 4.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures.
Not applicable.
PART II
Item 5.
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.
Our common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “POWI”. The following table shows the high and low closing sales prices per share of our common stock as reported on the NASDAQ Global Select Market for the periods indicated during which our common stock traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market.
As of February 9, 2018, there were approximately 37 stockholders of record. Because brokers and other institutions hold many of our shares on behalf of stockholders, we are unable to estimate the total number of stockholders represented by these record holders.
Dividends Declared Per Common Share
The following table presents the quarterly dividends declared per share of our common stock for the periods indicated:
We paid a total of $16.6 million and $15.1 million in cash dividends during 2017 and 2016, respectively.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Over the years our board of directors has authorized the use of funds to repurchase shares of our common stock, including $30.0 million in each of July 2015, October 2015 and July 2017, with repurchases to be executed according to pre-defined price/volume guidelines. In 2015, we purchased 1.3 million shares for approximately $53.7 million. In 2016, we purchased 146,000 shares for approximately $6.4 million. In 2017, we purchased 129,000 shares for approximately $9.2 million. As of December 31, 2017, we had $44.4 million available for future stock repurchases, which has no expiration date. In January 2018, our board of directors authorized the use of an additional $30.0 million for the repurchase of our common stock, with repurchases to be executed according to pre-defined price/volume guidelines. Authorization of future stock repurchase programs is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on our financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements and business conditions as well as other factors.
The following table summarizes repurchases of our common stock during the fourth quarter of fiscal 2017:
Performance Graph (1)
The following graph shows the cumulative total stockholders return of an investment of $100 in cash on December 31, 2012, through December 31, 2017, in our common stock, the NASDAQ Composite Index and the NASDAQ Electronic Components Index and assuming that all dividends were reinvested. The stockholder return shown on the graph below is not necessarily indicative of future performance, and we do not make or endorse any predictions as to future stockholder returns.
_______________
(1)
This Section is not “soliciting material,” is not deemed “filed” with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference in any filing of Power Integrations under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, whether made before or after the date hereof and irrespective of any general incorporation language in any such filing.
Item 6.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data.
The following selected consolidated financial data should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations’’ and the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to fully understand factors that may affect the comparability of the information presented below.
_______________
(1)
In 2017 we adopted Accounting Standards Update 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which amended the accounting standards for revenue recognition. The standards were applied on a retrospective basis to 2015 and 2016 (refer to Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for details), but not to 2013 and 2014.
(2)
In December 2017 the U.S. government enacted comprehensive tax legislation commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Refer to Note 11, Provision for Income Taxes, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for details).
(3)
In 2015 we acquired Cambridge Semiconductor Limited (CamSemi), a UK company (refer to Note 14, Acquisitions, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for details).
Item 7.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.
The following discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of our operations should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the notes to those statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. See “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” at the beginning of this Form 10-K. Our actual results could differ materially from those contained in these forward-looking statements due to a number of factors, including those discussed in Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report.
Business Overview
We design, develop and market analog and mixed-signal integrated circuits (ICs) and other electronic components and circuitry used in high-voltage power conversion. Our products are used in power converters that convert electricity from a high-voltage source (typically 48 volts or higher) to the type of power required for a specified downstream use. In most cases, this conversion entails, among other functions, converting alternating current (AC) to direct current (DC) or vice versa, reducing or increasing the voltage, and regulating the output voltage and/or current according to the customer’s specifications.
A large percentage of our products are ICs used in AC-DC power supplies, which convert the high-voltage AC from a wall outlet to the low-voltage DC required by most electronic devices. Power supplies incorporating our products are used with all manner of electronic products including mobile phones, computing and networking equipment, appliances, electronic utility meters, power tools, industrial controls, and lighting applications that utilize light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and “smart-home,” or “internet of things” applications such as networked thermostats, power strips and other building-automation and security devices.
We also offer high-voltage gate drivers- either standalone ICs or circuit boards containing ICs, electrical isolation components and other circuitry- used to operate high-voltage switches such as insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs). These combinations of switches and drivers are used for power conversion in high-power applications (i.e., power levels ranging from a few kilowatts up to one gigawatt) such as industrial motors, solar- and wind-power systems, electric vehicles and high-voltage DC transmission systems.
Our net revenues were $431.8 million, $389.7 million and $344.6 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. In 2017 revenues increased by $42.1 million due to higher unit sales into the industrial and consumer end-markets, driven by growth from a broad range of industrial and consumer-appliance applications. In 2016 revenues increased by $45.1 million due primarily to higher unit sales into the communications end-market, largely as a result of the success of our InnoSwitch products in mobile-device chargers. In addition, higher unit sales into the consumer market, particularly the consumer-appliance market, contributed to the increase in 2016. The increases in both 2017 and 2016 were partially offset by lower unit sales into the computer end-market, reflecting reduced demand for power supplies for desktop computers.
Our top ten customers, including distributors that resell to OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers, accounted for approximately 54%, 60% and 61% of net revenues in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. In 2017 our top customer, a distributor of our products, accounted for approximately 16% of our net revenues. In 2016 and 2015 our top two customers, also distributors, collectively accounted for approximately 28% and 32% of our net revenues. International sales represented approximately 96% of net revenues in each of 2017, 2016, and 2015.
Because our industry is intensely price-sensitive, our gross margin (gross profit divided by net revenues) is subject to change based on the relative pricing of solutions that compete with ours. Variations in product mix, end-market mix and customer mix can also cause our gross margin to fluctuate. Also, because we purchase a large percentage of our silicon wafers from foundries located in Japan, our gross margin is influenced by fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen. All else being equal, a 10% change in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the Japanese yen would eventually result in a corresponding change in our gross margin of approximately 1.0%; this sensitivity may increase or decrease depending on the percentage of our wafer supply that we purchase from Japanese suppliers. Also, although our wafer fabrication and assembly operations are outsourced, as are most of our test operations, a portion of our production costs are fixed in nature. As a result, our unit costs and gross profit margin are impacted by the volume of units we produce.
Our gross profit, defined as net revenues less cost of revenues, was $213.7 million or 49% of net revenues in 2017, compared to $192.2 million or 49% of net revenues in 2016, and $173.3 million or 50% of net revenues in 2015. Our gross margin in 2017 was flat compared to 2016 as a favorable change in end-market mix was offset by higher manufacturing costs stemming from a decline in the value of the U.S. dollar versus the Japanese yen in 2016, which subsequently increased the cost of silicon wafers purchased from our Japanese wafer-fabrication foundries. The decrease in gross margin in 2016 was due primarily to a change in end-market mix, with a greater percentage of revenues coming from lower-margin end-markets, particularly communications.
Total operating expenses in 2017, 2016 and 2015 were $156.0 million, $143.3 million and $134.4 million, respectively. The increase in operating expenses in 2017 was due primarily to higher salary and related expenses due to the expansion of our workforce, increased legal expenses in connection with our litigation with ON Semiconductor, and increased stock-based compensation expense. Operating expenses increased in 2016 due primarily to increased stock-based compensation expense related to annual performance-based awards, and the expansion of headcount in support of our product-development efforts.
Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates
The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or U.S. GAAP, requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. On an ongoing basis, we evaluate our estimates, including those listed below. We base our estimates on historical facts and various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable at the time the estimates are made. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Our critical accounting policies are as follows:
•
revenue recognition;
•
stock-based compensation;
•
estimating write-downs for excess and obsolete inventory;
•
income taxes;
•
business combinations; and
•
goodwill and intangible assets.
Our critical accounting policies are important to the portrayal of our financial condition and results of operations, and require us to make judgments and estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. A brief description of these critical accounting policies is set forth below. For more information regarding our accounting policies, see Note 2, Summary of Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Revenue recognition
Product revenues consist of sales to original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, merchant power supply manufacturers and distributors. Approximately 77% of our net product sales were made to distributors in 2017. We apply the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 606-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, and all related appropriate guidance. We recognize revenue under the core principle to depict the transfer of control to our customers in an amount reflecting the consideration we expect to be entitled. In order to achieve that core principle, we apply the following five-step approach: (1) identify the contract with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) recognize revenue when a performance obligation is satisfied.
Product revenues consist of sales to original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, merchant power supply manufacturers and distributors. We consider customer purchase orders, which in some cases are governed by master sales agreements, to be the contracts with a customer. In situations where sales are to a distributor, we have concluded that our contracts are with the distributor as we hold contracts bearing enforceable rights and obligations with only the distributor. As part of our consideration of the contract, we evaluate certain factors including the customer’s ability to pay (or credit risk). For each contract, we consider the promise to transfer products, each of which is distinct, to be the identified performance obligations. In determining the transaction price we evaluate whether the price is subject to refund or adjustment to determine the net consideration to which we expect to be entitled. As our standard payment terms are less than one year, we elected the practical expedient under ASC 606-10-32-18 to not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component. We allocate the transaction price to each distinct product based on their relative standalone selling price. We consider the product price as specified on the purchase order the standalone selling price as it is an observable input which depicts the price as if sold to a similar customer in similar circumstances. We recognize revenue when control of the product is transferred to the customer (i.e., when our performance obligation is satisfied), which typically occurs at shipment. Further, in determining whether control has transferred, we consider if there is a present right to payment and legal title, along with risks and rewards of ownership having transferred to the customer.
Frequently, we receive orders for products to be delivered over multiple dates that may extend across several reporting periods. We invoice for each delivery upon shipment and recognize revenue for each distinct product delivered, assuming transfer of control has occurred. As scheduled delivery dates are within one year, under the optional exemption provided by ASC 606-10-50-14 revenues allocated to future shipments of partially completed contracts are not disclosed. We have also elected the practical expedient under ASC 340-40-25-4 to expense commissions when incurred as the amortization period of the commission asset we would have otherwise recognized is less than one year.
Sales to international customers that are shipped from our facility outside of the United States are pursuant to EX Works, or EXW, shipping terms, meaning that control of the product transfers to the customer upon shipment from our foreign warehouse. Sales to international customers that we ship from our facility in California are pursuant to Delivered at Frontier, or DAF, shipping
terms. As such, control of the product passes to the customer when the shipment reaches the destination country and we recognize revenue upon the arrival of the product in that country. Shipments to customers in the Americas are pursuant to Free on Board, or FOB, point of origin shipping terms meaning that we pass control to the customer upon shipment.
Sales to most distributors are made under terms allowing certain price adjustments and limited rights of return (known as “stock rotation”) of our products held in their inventory or upon sale to their end customers. We recognize revenue from sales to distributors upon the transfer of control to the distributor. Frequently, distributors need to sell at a price lower than the standard distribution price in order to win business. At the time the distributor invoices its customer or soon thereafter, the distributor submits a “ship and debit” price adjustment claim to us to adjust the distributor’s cost from the standard price to the pre-approved lower price. After we verify that the claim was pre-approved, we issue a credit memo to the distributor for the ship and debit claim. In determining the transaction price, we consider ship and debit price adjustments to be variable consideration. Such price adjustments are estimated using the expected value method based on an analysis of actual ship and debit claims, at the distributor and product level, over a period of time considered adequate to account for current pricing and business trends. Historically, actual price adjustments for ship and debit claims relative to those estimated and included when determining the transaction price have not materially differed. To the extent future ship and debit claims significantly exceed amounts estimated, there could be a material impact on our revenues and results of operations. Stock rotation rights grant the distributor the ability to return certain specified amounts of inventory. Stock rotation adjustments are an additional form of variable consideration and are also estimated using the expected value method based on historical return rates. Historically, these distributor stock rotation adjustments have not been material.
Sales to certain distributors are made under terms that do not include rights of return or price concessions after the product is shipped to the distributor. Accordingly, upon application of steps one through five above, product revenue is recognized upon shipment and transfer of control.
We generally provide an assurance warrant that our products will substantially conform to the published specifications for twelve months from the date of shipment. Our liability is limited to either a credit equal to the purchase price or replacement of the defective part. Returns under warranty have historically been immaterial. As such, we do not record a specific warranty reserve or consider activities related to such warranty, if any, to be a separate performance obligation.
Stock-based compensation
We apply the provisions of ASC 718-10, Share-Based Payment. Under the provisions of ASC 718-10, we recognize the fair value of stock-based compensation in our financial statements over the requisite service period of the individual grants, which generally equals a four-year vesting period. We use estimates of volatility, expected term, risk-free interest rate, dividend yield and forfeitures in determining the fair value of these awards and the amount of compensation expense to recognize. Changes in the estimated forfeiture rate could result in changes to our current compensation charges for historical grants.
For awards with performance conditions, we recognize compensation expense when it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved. A probability assessment is performed on a quarterly basis and requires significant assumptions and estimates made by management related to the projected achievement of the performance targets, which consist of non-GAAP operating earnings, strategic goals and/or net revenues. Changes in the probability assessment of achieving the performance targets are accounted for in the period of change by recording a cumulative catch-up adjustment as if the new estimate had been applied since the service inception date. If the actual performance targets achieved differ significantly from those projected by management, additional compensation expense may be recorded for the performance-based awards due to the cumulative catch-up adjustment, which could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.
Estimating write-downs for excess and obsolete inventory
When evaluating the adequacy of our valuation adjustments for excess and obsolete inventory, we identify excess and obsolete products and also analyze historical usage, forecasted production based on demand forecasts, current economic trends and historical write-offs. This write-down is reflected as a reduction to inventory in the consolidated balance sheets and an increase in cost of revenues. If actual market conditions are less favorable than our assumptions, we may be required to take additional write-downs, which could adversely impact our cost of revenues and operating results.
Income taxes
Income tax expense is an estimate of current income taxes payable or refundable in the current fiscal year based on reported income before income taxes. Deferred income taxes reflect the effect of temporary differences and carry-forwards that are recognized for financial reporting and income tax purposes.
We account for income taxes under the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes. Under the provisions of ASC 740, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on the differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets
and liabilities and their respective tax bases, utilizing the tax rates that are expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. We recognize valuation allowances to reduce any deferred tax assets to the amount that we estimate will more likely than not be realized based on available evidence and management’s judgment. We limit the deferred tax assets recognized related to some of our officers’ compensation to amounts that we estimate will be deductible in future periods based upon Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). In the event that we determine, based on available evidence and management judgment, that all or part of the net deferred tax assets will not be realized in the future, we would record a valuation allowance in the period the determination is made. In addition, the calculation of tax liabilities involves significant judgment in estimating the impact of uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner inconsistent with our expectations could have a material impact on our results of operations and financial position.
As of December 31, 2017, we continue to maintain a valuation allowance on our California deferred tax assets as we believe that it is not more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will be fully realized. We also maintain a valuation allowance with respect to some of our deferred tax assets relating primarily to tax credits in Canada and the state of New Jersey as well as Federal capital loss carryforwards.
Business combinations
The purchase price of an acquisition is allocated to the underlying assets acquired and liabilities assumed based upon their estimated fair values at the date of acquisition. To the extent the purchase price exceeds the fair value of the net identifiable tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed, such excess is allocated to goodwill. We determine the estimated fair values after review and consideration of relevant information, including discounted cash flows, quoted market prices and estimates made by management. We adjust the preliminary purchase price allocation, as necessary, during the measurement period of up to one year after the acquisition closing date as we obtain more information as to facts and circumstances existing at the acquisition date impacting asset valuations and liabilities assumed. Acquisition-related costs are recognized separately from the acquisition and are expensed as incurred.
Goodwill and intangible assets
In accordance with ASC 350-10, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, we evaluate goodwill for impairment on an annual basis, or as other indicators of impairment emerge. Under the amendments of Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2017-04, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350), we compare the fair value of our single reporting unit to the carrying amount, including goodwill. If the fair value of our single reporting unit exceeds the carrying amount no impairment adjustment is required. If the carrying amount of our reporting unit exceeds the fair value, then we record an impairment loss equal to the difference, but not in excess of the carrying amount of the goodwill. Under ASC 350-10, we have the option to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether the existence of events or circumstances leads to a determination that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount. If, we elect this option and after assessing the totality of events or circumstances, we determine it is not more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, then comparing the fair value of a reporting unit to its carrying amount is unnecessary. We have not elected this option to date. We evaluated goodwill for impairment in the fourth quarters of 2017 and 2016, and concluded that no impairment existed as of December 31, 2017, and December 31, 2016.
ASC 350-10 also requires that intangible assets with estimable useful lives be amortized over their respective estimated useful lives, and reviewed for impairment in accordance with ASC 360-10, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets. We review long-lived assets, such as acquired intangibles and property and equipment, for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. We measure recoverability of assets to be held and used by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated future cash flows, we recognize an impairment charge by the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset.
Results of Operations
The following table sets forth statement of income data as a percentage of net revenues for the periods indicated:
Comparison of Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015
Net revenues. Net revenues consist of revenues from product sales, which are calculated net of returns and allowances. In 2017 revenues increased by $42.1 million due to higher unit sales into the industrial and consumer end-markets, driven by growth from a broad range of industrial and consumer-appliance applications. These increases were partially offset by lower unit sales into the computer end-market, reflecting reduced demand for power supplies for desktop computers. In 2016 revenues increased by $45.1 million due primarily to higher unit sales into the communications end-market, largely as a result of the success of our InnoSwitch products in mobile-device chargers as well as the consumer market, particularly the consumer-appliance market. These increases were partially offset by lower unit sales into the computer end-market, reflecting reduced demand for power supplies for desktop computers.
Our approximate net revenue mix by end-markets served in 2017, 2016 and 2015 is as follows:
Sales to customers outside of the United States were $415.1 million in 2017, compared to $374.7 million in 2016 and $329.9 million in 2015, representing approximately 96% of net revenues in each of 2017, 2016 and 2015. Although power supplies using our products are designed and distributed worldwide, most of these power supplies are manufactured by our customers in Asia. As a result, sales to this region accounted for approximately 79%, 81% and 80% of our net revenues in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. We expect international sales to continue to account for a large portion of our net revenues for the foreseeable future.
Sales to distributors accounted for 77%, 75% and 76% of our net revenues in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively, with direct sales to OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers accounting for the remainder in each of the corresponding years. In 2017 one distributor accounted for more than 10% of revenues. In 2016 and 2015, two distributors each accounted for more than 10% of revenues.
The following customers each accounted for 10% or more of net revenues during these years:
_______________
* Total customer revenue was less than 10% of net revenues.
No other customers accounted for 10% or more of net revenues during these years.
Gross profit. Gross profit is net revenues less cost of revenues. Our cost of revenues consists primarily of the purchase of wafers from our contracted foundries, the assembly, packaging and testing of our products by sub-contractors, product testing performed in our own facility, overhead associated with the management of our supply chain and the amortization of acquired intangible assets. Gross margin is gross profit divided by net revenues. The following table compares gross profit and gross margin for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Our gross margin was essentially flat in 2017 compared to 2016 as a favorable change in end-market mix was largely offset by higher costs stemming from a decline in the value of the U.S. dollar versus the Japanese yen in 2016, which subsequently increased the cost of silicon wafers purchased from our Japanese foundries. The decrease in gross margin in 2016 was due primarily to a change in end-market mix, with a greater percentage of revenue coming from lower-margin end-markets, particularly the communications market.
Research and development expenses. Research and development (R&D) expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses including stock-based compensation and expensed material and facility costs associated with the development of new processes and new products. We also record R&D expenses for prototype wafers related to new products until the products are released to production. The following table compares R&D expenses for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
R&D expenses increased in 2017 compared to 2016, reflecting increased salary and related expenses from the expansion of headcount, and greater equipment and product-development expenses, all in support of our product-development efforts. R&D expenses increased in 2016 as compared to 2015 primarily due to increased stock-based compensation expense related to performance-based stock awards as a result of our 2016 performance. The expansion of headcount in support of our product-development efforts also contributed to the 2016 increase.
Sales and marketing expenses. Sales and marketing expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses, including stock-based compensation, commissions to sales representatives, amortization of acquired intangible assets and facilities expenses, including expenses associated with our regional sales and support offices. The following table compares sales and marketing expenses for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Sales and marketing expenses increased in 2017 compared to 2016 primarily due primarily to the expansion of our sales force, resulting in higher salary and related expenses. Sales and marketing expenses increased in 2016 compared to 2015 primarily due to increased stock-based compensation expense related to performance-based stock awards as a result of our 2016 performance. Higher bonus and sales commissions also contributed to the 2016 increase.
General and administrative expenses. General and administrative (G&A) expenses consist primarily of employee-related expenses, including stock-based compensation expenses for administration, finance, human resources and general management, as well as consulting, professional services, legal and auditing expenses. The table below compares G&A expenses for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
G&A expenses increased in each of 2017 and 2016 due primarily to increased expenses related to our litigation with ON Semiconductor, as well as increased stock-based compensation expense.
Other income. Other income consists primarily of interest income earned on cash and cash equivalents, marketable securities and other investments, and the impact of foreign exchange gains or losses. The following table compares other income for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Other income increased in 2017 due primarily to an increase in interest income reflecting an increase in our cash and investment balances along with higher yields earned on those balances. Other income increased in 2016 compared to 2015 due primarily to the unfavorable impact in 2015 of foreign currency movements relative to the U.S. dollar and the related loss recognized from the re-measurement of monetary foreign currency assets and liabilities of our Swiss subsidiary.
Provision for income taxes. Provision for income taxes represents federal, state and foreign taxes. The following table compares the provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
Our effective tax rate is impacted by the geographic distribution of our world-wide earnings in lower tax jurisdictions and the federal R&D tax credit. In 2017 our effective tax rate was impacted by a $37.5 million charge resulting from the enactment of the U.S. Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Tax Act). For additional details on the impact of the Tax Act, refer to Note 11, Provision for Income Taxes, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Additionally, in 2017 our rate was favorably impacted by the recognition of excess tax benefits related to share-based payments of approximately $2.1 million. Effective January 1, 2017, we adopted Accounting Standards Update 2016-09 (ASU 2016-09), Compensation - Stock Compensation, under which all excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies are recognized prospectively as income tax expense or benefit in the income statement. For additional details on our adoption of ASU 2016-09, refer to Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
We had approximately $282.9 million in cash, cash equivalents and short-term marketable securities at December 31, 2017 compared to $250.5 million at December 31, 2016, and $173.9 million at December 31, 2015. As of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, we had working capital, defined as current assets less current liabilities, of approximately $313.5 million, $274.3 million and $203.1 million, respectively.
On July 27, 2016, we entered into a credit agreement with a bank (the "Credit Agreement") that provides us with a $75.0 million revolving line of credit to use for general corporate purposes with a $20.0 million sub-limit for the issuance of standby and trade letters of credit. Our ability to borrow under the revolving line of credit is conditioned upon our compliance with specified covenants, including reporting and financial covenants, primarily a minimum liquidity measure and a debt to earnings ratio, with which we are currently in compliance. The Credit Agreement terminates on July 26, 2019; all advances under the revolving line of credit will become due on such date, or earlier in the event of a default. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, we had no amounts outstanding under our agreement.
Our operating activities generated cash of $82.0 million, $97.9 million, and $92.2 million in the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. In each of these years, cash was primarily generated from operating activities in the ordinary course of business.
In 2017, our net income was $27.6 million, which included stock-based compensation expenses, non-cash depreciation and amortization of $24.7 million, $18.4 million and $6.1 million, respectively. Sources of cash also included a $20.0 million increase in taxes payable and accrued liabilities driven by the long-term portion of the taxes payable related to the transitional impact of the U.S. Tax Act and a $0.4 million increase in accounts payable due to the timing of payments. These sources of cash were partially offset by a $17.6 million increase in prepaid expenses and other assets, primarily driven by advances to suppliers and prepaid legal expenses, a $10.5 million increase in accounts receivable due to the timing of collections along with increased shipments and a $4.5 million increase in inventories to support increased demand.
In 2016, our net income was $48.9 million, which included stock-based compensation expenses, non-cash depreciation and amortization of $20.9 million, $16.8 million, and $6.7 million, respectively. Sources of cash included a $7.7 million increase in accounts payable due to timing of payments. These sources of cash were partially offset by a $2.5 million increase in prepaid expenses and other assets due to an increase in prepaid income taxes, and a $1.1 million decrease in taxes payable and accrued liabilities.
In 2015, our net income was $39.2 million, which included non-cash depreciation, stock-based compensation expenses and amortization of $16.5 million, $14.8 million and $7.0 million, respectively. Sources of cash also included a $13.5 million decrease in inventory due to reduction efforts, a $4.1 million decrease in accounts receivable due to the timing of collections, and a $3.3 million decrease in prepaid expenses and other assets due to income tax refunds received during the period. These sources of cash were partially offset by a $5.5 million increase in deferred taxes, and a $2.0 million decrease in accounts payable due to the timing of payments.
Our investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2017, resulted in a $34.7 million net use of cash, consisting primarily of $32.5 million for purchases of property and equipment, primarily machinery and equipment for use in the manufacture of our products, and $2.2 million from the purchase of marketable securities, net of maturities.
Our investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2016, resulted in a net $117.4 million use of cash, consisting primarily of $105.2 million from the purchase of marketable securities, net of maturities, and $12.2 million for purchases of property and equipment, primarily machinery and equipment for use in the manufacture of our products.
Our investing activities in the year ended December 31, 2015, resulted in a net $7.7 million use of cash, consisting primarily of $15.5 million in net cash paid for the acquisition of CamSemi, $11.4 million for purchases of property and equipment, primarily machinery and equipment for use in the manufacture of our products, and $10.4 million net cash paid for a building purchase (refer to Note 14, Acquisitions, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, for details). These uses of cash were partially offset by $29.6 million of proceeds from the sale and maturity of marketable securities, net of purchases.
Our financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2017, resulted in a net use of $15.8 million of cash. Financing activities consisted primarily of $16.6 million for the payment of dividends to stockholders and $9.2 million for the repurchase of our common stock, partially offset by proceeds of $10.0 million from the issuance of common stock, including the exercise of employee stock options and the issuance of shares through our employee stock purchase plan.
Our financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2016, resulted in a net use of $8.4 million of cash. Financing activities consisted primarily of $6.4 million for the repurchase of our common stock and $15.1 million for the payment of dividends to stockholders, partially offset by proceeds of $13.1 million from the issuance of common stock, including the exercise of employee stock options and the issuance of shares through our employee stock purchase plan.
Our financing activities in the year ended December 31, 2015, resulted in a net use of $55.1 million of cash. Financing activities consisted primarily of $53.7 million for the repurchase of our common stock and $13.9 million for the payment of dividends to stockholders, partially offset by proceeds of $12.6 million from the issuance of common stock, including the exercise of employee stock options and the issuance of shares through our employee stock purchase plan.
In January 2015, our board of directors continued the $0.12 per share quarterly dividend through each quarter in 2015. In January 2016, our board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends in the amount of $0.13 per share to be paid to stockholders of record at the end of each quarter in 2016. In January 2017, our board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends in the amount of $0.14 per share to be paid to stockholders of record at the end of each quarter in 2017.
In January 2018, our board of directors declared four quarterly cash dividends in the amount of $0.16 per share to be paid to stockholders of record at the end of each quarter in 2018. The declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on our financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, business conditions and other factors, as well as a determination that cash dividends are in the best interest of our stockholders.
Over the years our board of directors has authorized the use of funds to repurchase shares of our common stock, including $60.0 million authorized in 2015, and $30.0 million authorized in 2017, with repurchases to be executed according to pre-defined price/volume guidelines. In 2015, we purchased 1.3 million shares for approximately $53.7 million. In 2016, we purchased 146,000 shares for approximately $6.4 million. In 2017, we purchased 129,000 shares for approximately $9.2 million. As of December 31, 2017, $44.4 million was available for future stock repurchases, which has no expiration date. In January 2018, our board of directors authorized the use of an additional $30.0 million for the repurchase of our common stock, with repurchases to be executed according to pre-defined price/volume guidelines. Authorization of future stock repurchase programs is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on our financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements and business conditions as well as other factors.
As of December 31, 2017, we had a contractual obligation related to income tax, consisting primarily of unrecognized tax benefits of approximately $16.7 million. The tax obligation was classified as long-term income taxes payable or recorded as contra deferred tax assets in our consolidated balance sheet.
Our cash, cash equivalents and investment balances may change in future periods due to changes in our planned cash outlays, including changes in incremental costs such as direct and integration costs related to future acquisitions. We expect continued sales growth in our foreign business and plan to use the earnings generated by our foreign subsidiaries to continue to fund both the working capital and growth needs of our foreign entities, along with providing funding for any future foreign acquisitions. The recent Tax Act signed into law on December 22, 2017 subjects U.S. companies to a one-time transition tax on total post-1986 earnings and
profits of their foreign subsidiaries and generally allows companies to repatriate accumulated foreign earnings without incurring additional U.S. federal taxes beginning after December 31, 2017. Accordingly, as of December 31, 2017, our worldwide cash and marketable securities are available to fund capital allocation needs, including capital and internal investments, acquisitions, stock repurchases and/or dividends without incurring additional U.S. federal income taxes.
If our operating results deteriorate in future periods, either as a result of a decrease in customer demand or pricing pressures from our customers or our competitors, or for other reasons, our ability to generate positive cash flow from operations may be jeopardized. In that case, we may be forced to use our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, use our current financing or seek additional financing from third parties to fund our operations. We believe that cash generated from operations, together with existing sources of liquidity, will satisfy our projected working capital and other cash requirements for at least the next 12 months.
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, we did not have any off-balance sheet arrangements or relationships with unconsolidated entities or financial partnerships, such as entities often referred to as structured finance or special purpose entities, which are typically established for the purpose of facilitating off-balance sheet arrangements or other contractually narrow or limited purposes.
Contractual Obligations
As of December 31, 2017, we had the following contractual obligations and commitments, consisting solely of non-cancelable operating lease agreements:
In addition to our contractual obligations noted above we have a contractual obligation related to income tax as of December 31, 2017, which primarily comprises unrecognized tax benefits of approximately $16.7 million, and was classified as contra deferred tax assets or long-term income taxes payable in our consolidated balance sheet. As of December 31, 2017 we also had approximately $15.4 million classified as long-term income taxes payable related to the estimated one-time transition tax from the enactment of the Tax Act which will be payable in eight annual installments.
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
For recently issued accounting announcements, see “Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements” in Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Item 7A.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.
Interest Rate Risk. Our exposure to market risk for changes in interest rates relates primarily to our investment portfolio. We consider cash invested in highly liquid financial instruments with a remaining maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Investments in highly liquid financial instruments with maturities greater than three months are classified as short-term investments. We generally hold securities until maturity; however, they may be sold under certain circumstances, including, but not limited to, when necessary for the funding of acquisitions and other strategic investments. As a result of this policy, we classify our investment portfolio as available-for-sale. We invest in high-credit quality issuers and, by policy, limit the amount of credit exposure to any one issuer. As stated in our policy, we seek to ensure the safety and preservation of our invested principal funds by limiting default risk, market risk and reinvestment risk. We mitigate default risk by investing in safe and high-credit quality securities and by constantly positioning our portfolio to respond appropriately to a significant reduction in a credit rating of any investment issuer, guarantor or depository. The portfolio includes only marketable securities with active secondary or resale markets to facilitate portfolio liquidity. At December 31, 2017 and 2016, we held primarily cash equivalents and short-term investments with fixed interest rates. We do not hold any instruments for trading purposes.
Our investment securities are subject to market interest rate risk and will vary in value as market interest rates fluctuate. To minimize market risk, we invest in high-credit quality issuers and, by policy, limit the amount of credit exposure to any one issuer, and therefore if market interest rates were to increase or decrease by 10% from interest rates as of December 31, 2017, or December 31, 2016, the increase or decrease in the fair market value of our portfolio on these dates would not have been material. We monitor our investments for impairment on a periodic basis. Refer to Note 5, Marketable Securities, in our Notes to Consolidated Financial
Statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, for a tabular presentation of our available-for-sale investments and the expected maturity dates.
Foreign Currency Exchange Risk. As of December 31, 2017, our primary transactional currency was the U.S. dollar; in addition, we hold cash in Swiss francs and euros to fund the operation of our Swiss subsidiary. Cash balances held in foreign countries are subject to local banking laws and may bear higher or lower risk than cash deposited in the United States. The following represents the potential impact on our pretax income from a change in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the Swiss franc and euro as of December 31, 2017. This sensitivity analysis applies a change in the U.S. dollar value of 5% and 10%.
The foreign exchange rate fluctuation between the U.S. dollar versus the Swiss franc and euro is recorded in other income in our consolidated statements of income.
We have sales offices in various other foreign countries in which our expenses are denominated in the local currency, primary Asia and Western Europe. From time to time we may enter into foreign currency hedging contracts to hedge certain foreign currency transactions. As of December 31, 2017, and December 31, 2016, we did not have an open foreign currency hedge program utilizing foreign currency forward exchange contracts.
With two of our major suppliers, Seiko Epson Corporation (Epson) and ROHM Lapis Semiconductor Co., Ltd. (Lapis) we have wafer supply agreements based in U.S. dollars; however, our agreements with Epson and Lapis also allow for mutual sharing of the impact of the exchange rate fluctuation between Japanese yen and the U.S. dollar. Each year, our management and these suppliers review and negotiate pricing; the negotiated pricing is denominated in U.S. dollars but is subject to contractual exchange rate provisions. The fluctuation in the exchange rate is shared equally between us and each of these suppliers.
Nevertheless, as a result of our above-mentioned supplier agreements, our gross margin is influenced by fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the Japanese yen. All else being equal, a 10% change in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to the Japanese yen would eventually result in a corresponding change in our gross margin of approximately 1.0%; this sensitivity may increase or decrease depending on the percentage of our wafer supply that we purchase from some of our Japanese suppliers and could subject our gross profit and operating results to the potential for material fluctuations.
Item 8.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of Power Integrations, Inc.
Opinion on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Power Integrations, Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, and the related notes and the schedule listed in the Index at Item 15 (collectively referred to as the "financial statements"). In our opinion, the financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, in conformity with the accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission and our report dated February 14, 2018 expressed an unqualified opinion on the Company's internal control over financial reporting.
Basis for Opinion
These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company's financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
February 14, 2018
We have served as the Company's auditor since 2005.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
1. THE COMPANY:
Power Integrations, Inc. (“Power Integrations” or the “Company”), incorporated in California on March 25, 1988, and reincorporated in Delaware in December 1997, designs, develops, manufactures and markets analog and mixed-signal integrated circuits (ICs) and other electronic components and circuitry used in high-voltage power conversion. The Company’s products are used in power converters that convert electricity from a high-voltage source (typically 48 volts or higher) to the type of power required for a specified downstream use. A large percentage of the Company’s products are ICs used in AC-DC power supplies, which convert the high-voltage AC from a wall outlet to the low-voltage DC required by most electronic devices. Power supplies incorporating the Company’s products are used with all manner of electronic products including mobile phones, computing and networking equipment, appliances, electronic utility meters, power tools, industrial controls, lighting applications that utilize light-emitting diodes (LEDs), and “smart-home,” or “internet of things” applications such as networked thermostats, power strips and other building-automation and security devices. The Company also offers high-voltage gate drivers - either standalone ICs or circuit boards containing ICs, electrical isolation components and other circuitry - used to operate high-voltage switches such as insulated-gate bipolar transistors (IGBTs). These combinations of switches and drivers are used for power conversion in high-power applications (i.e., power levels ranging from a few kilowatts up to one gigawatt) such as industrial motors, solar- and wind-power systems, electric vehicles and high-voltage DC transmission systems.
2. SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS:
Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates
Segment Reporting
The Company is organized and operates as one reportable segment, the design, development, manufacture and marketing of integrated circuits and related components for use primarily in high-voltage power conversion market. The Company’s chief operating decision maker, the Chief Executive Officer, reviews financial information presented on a consolidated basis for purposes of making operating decisions and assessing financial performance.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries after elimination of all intercompany transactions and balances.
Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. On an ongoing basis, the Company evaluates its estimates, including those related to revenue recognition and allowances for receivables and inventories. These estimates are based on historical facts and various other factors, which the Company believes to be reasonable at the time the estimates are made. However, as the effects of future events cannot be determined with precision, actual results could differ significantly from management’s estimates.
Revenue Recognition
The Company applies the provisions of Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) 606-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, and all related appropriate guidance. The Company recognizes revenue under the core principle to depict the transfer of control to the Company’s customers in an amount reflecting the consideration the Company expects to be entitled. In order to achieve that core principle, the Company applies the following five-step approach: (1) identify the contract with a customer, (2) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) determine the transaction price, (4) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) recognize revenue when a performance obligation is satisfied.
Product revenues consist of sales to original equipment manufacturers, or OEMs, merchant power supply manufacturers and distributors. The Company considers customer purchase orders, which in some cases are governed by master sales agreements, to be the contracts with a customer. In situations where sales are to a distributor, the Company has concluded that its contracts are with the distributor as the Company holds a contract bearing enforceable rights and obligations only with the distributor. As part of its consideration of the contract, the Company evaluates certain factors including the customer’s ability to pay (or credit risk). For
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
each contract, the Company considers the promise to transfer products, each of which is distinct, to be the identified performance obligations. In determining the transaction price the Company evaluates whether the price is subject to refund or adjustment to determine the net consideration to which the Company expects to be entitled. As the Company’s standard payment terms are less than one year, the Company has elected the practical expedient under ASC 606-10-32-18 to not assess whether a contract has a significant financing component. The Company allocates the transaction price to each distinct product based on their relative standalone selling price. The product price as specified on the purchase order is considered the standalone selling price as it is an observable input which depicts the price as if sold to a similar customer in similar circumstances. Revenue is recognized when control of the product is transferred to the customer (i.e., when the Company’s performance obligation is satisfied), which typically occurs at shipment. Further, in determining whether control has transferred, the Company considers if there is a present right to payment and legal title, along with risks and rewards of ownership having transferred to the customer.
Frequently, the Company receives orders for products to be delivered over multiple dates that may extend across several reporting periods. The Company invoices for each delivery upon shipment and recognizes revenues for each distinct product delivered, assuming transfer of control has occurred. As scheduled delivery dates are within one year, under the optional exemption provided by ASC 606-10-50-14 revenues allocated to future shipments of partially completed contracts are not disclosed. The Company has also elected the practical expedient under ASC 340-40-25-4 to expense commissions when incurred as the amortization period of the commission asset the Company would have otherwise recognized is less than one year.
Sales to international customers that are shipped from the Company’s facility outside of the United States are pursuant to EX Works, or EXW, shipping terms, meaning that control of the product transfers to the customer upon shipment from the Company’s foreign warehouse. Sales to international customers that are shipped from the Company’s facility in California are pursuant to Delivered at Frontier, or DAF, shipping terms. As such, control of the product passes to the customer when the shipment reaches the destination country and revenue is recognized upon the arrival of the product in that country. Shipments to customers in the Americas are pursuant to Free on Board, or FOB, point of origin shipping terms meaning that control is passed to the customer upon shipment.
Sales to most distributors are made under terms allowing certain price adjustments and limited rights of return (known as “stock rotation”) of the Company’s products held in their inventory or upon sale to their end customers. Revenue from sales to distributors is recognized upon the transfer of control to the distributor. Frequently, distributors need to sell at a price lower than the standard distribution price in order to win business. At the time the distributor invoices its customer or soon thereafter, the distributor submits a “ship and debit” price adjustment claim to the Company to adjust the distributor’s cost from the standard price to the pre-approved lower price. After the Company verifies that the claim was pre-approved, a credit memo is issued to the distributor for the ship and debit claim. In determining the transaction price, the Company considers ship and debit price adjustments to be variable consideration. Such price adjustments are estimated using the expected value method based on an analysis of actual ship and debit claims, at the distributor and product level, over a period of time considered adequate to account for current pricing and business trends. Historically, actual price adjustments for ship and debit claims relative to those estimated and included when determining the transaction price have not materially differed. Stock rotation rights grant the distributor the ability to return certain specified amounts of inventory. Stock rotation adjustments are an additional form of variable consideration and are also estimated using the expected value method based on historical return rates. Historically, distributor stock rotation adjustments have not been material.
Sales to certain distributors are made under terms that do not include rights of return or price concessions after the product is shipped to the distributor. Accordingly, upon application of steps one through five above, product revenue is recognized upon shipment and transfer of control.
The Company generally provides an assurance warranty that its products will substantially conform to the published specifications for twelve months from the date of shipment. The Company’s liability is limited to either a credit equal to the purchase price or replacement of the defective part. Returns under warranty have historically been immaterial. As such, the Company does not record a specific warranty reserve or consider activities related to such warranty, if any, to be a separate performance obligation.
Inventories
Inventories (which consist of costs associated with the purchases of wafers from domestic and offshore foundries and of packaged components from offshore assembly manufacturers, as well as internal labor and overhead associated with the testing of both wafers and packaged components) are stated at the lower of cost (first-in, first-out) or market. Provisions, when required, are made to reduce excess and obsolete inventories to their estimated net realizable values.
Income Taxes
Income-tax expense is an estimate of current income taxes payable or refundable in the current fiscal year based on reported income before income taxes. Deferred income taxes reflect the effect of temporary differences and carry-forwards that are recognized for financial reporting and income tax purposes.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The Company accounts for income taxes under the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes. Under the provisions of ASC 740, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on the differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases, utilizing the tax rates that are expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The Company recognizes valuation allowances to reduce any deferred tax assets to the amount that it estimates will more likely than not be realized based on available evidence and management’s judgment. The Company limits the deferred tax assets recognized related to certain officers’ compensation to amounts that it estimates will be deductible in future periods based upon Internal Revenue Code Section 162(m). In the event that the Company determines, based on available evidence and management judgment, that all or part of the net deferred tax assets will not be realized in the future, it would record a valuation allowance in the period the determination is made. In addition, the calculation of tax liabilities involves significant judgment in estimating the impact of uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner inconsistent with the Company’s expectations could have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations and financial position.
Business Combinations
The purchase price of an acquisition is allocated to the underlying assets acquired and liabilities assumed based upon their estimated fair values at the date of acquisition. To the extent the purchase price exceeds the fair value of the net identifiable tangible and intangible assets acquired and liabilities assumed, such excess is allocated to goodwill. The Company determines the estimated fair values after review and consideration of relevant information, including discounted cash flows, quoted market prices and estimates made by management. The Company adjusts the preliminary purchase price allocation, as necessary, during the measurement period of up to one year after the acquisition closing date as it obtains more information as to facts and circumstances existing at the acquisition date impacting asset valuations and liabilities assumed. Acquisition-related costs are recognized separately from the acquisition and are expensed as incurred.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
Goodwill and the Company's domain name are evaluated in accordance with ASC 350-10, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets, and an impairment analysis is conducted on an annual basis, or sooner if indicators exist for a potential impairment.
In accordance with ASC 360-10, Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, long-lived assets, such as property and equipment and intangible assets, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers cash invested in highly liquid financial instruments with maturities of three months or less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents.
Marketable Securities
The Company generally holds securities until maturity; however, they may be sold under certain circumstances including, but not limited to, when necessary for the funding of acquisitions and other strategic investments. As a result the Company classifies its investment portfolio as available-for-sale. The Company classifies all investments with a maturity date greater than three months at the date of purchase as short-term marketable securities in its consolidated balance sheet. As of December 31, 2017, and December 31, 2016, the Company’s marketable securities consisted primarily of commercial paper, corporate bonds, government securities and/or other high-quality commercial securities.
Employee Benefits Plan
The Company sponsors a 401(k) tax-deferred savings plan for all employees in the United States who meet certain eligibility requirements. Participants may contribute up to the amount allowable as a deduction for federal income tax purposes. The Company is not required to contribute; however, the Company contributes a certain percentage of employee annual salaries on a discretionary basis, not to exceed an established threshold. The Company provided for a contribution of approximately $1.2 million in 2017 and approximately $1.1 million in each of 2016 and 2015.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Retirement Benefit Obligations (Pension)
The Company recognizes the over-funded or under-funded status of a defined benefit pension or post-retirement plan as an asset or liability in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. Actuarial gains and losses are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive loss, a component of stockholders’ equity, and are amortized as a component of net periodic cost over the remaining estimated service period of participants.
Foreign Currency Risk and Foreign Currency Translation
As of December 31, 2017, the Company’s primary transactional currency was U.S. dollars; in addition, the Company holds cash in Swiss francs and euros to fund the operations of the Company’s Swiss subsidiary. The foreign exchange rate fluctuation between the U.S. dollar versus the Swiss franc and euro is recorded in “other income” in the consolidated statements of income.
Gains and losses arising from the remeasurement of non-functional currency balances are recorded in ''other income'' in the accompanying consolidated statements of income. For each of the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 the Company realized foreign exchange transaction losses of $0.1 million and $0.5 million in 2015.
The functional currencies of the Company’s other subsidiaries are the local currencies. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities are translated into U.S. dollars at the current exchange rates as of the applicable balance sheet date. Revenues and expenses are translated at the average exchange rate prevailing during the period. Cumulative gains and losses from the translation of the foreign subsidiaries’ financial statements have been included in stockholders’ equity.
Warranty
The Company generally warrants that its products will substantially conform to the published specifications for 12 months from the date of shipment. The Company’s liability is limited to either a credit equal to the purchase price or replacement of the defective part. Returns under warranty have historically been immaterial, and as a result, the Company does not record a specific warranty reserve.
Advertising
Advertising costs are expensed as incurred. In each of 2017 and 2016 advertising costs amounted to $1.3 million and $1.1 million in 2015.
Research and Development
Research and development costs are expensed as incurred.
Indemnifications
The Company sells products to its distributors under contracts, collectively referred to as Distributor Sales Agreements (DSA). Each DSA contains the relevant terms of the contractual arrangement with the distributor, and generally includes certain provisions for indemnifying the distributor against losses, expenses, and liabilities from damages that may be awarded against the distributor in the event the Company’s products are found to infringe upon a patent, copyright, trademark, or other proprietary right of a third party (Customer Indemnification). The DSA generally limits the scope of and remedies for the Customer Indemnification obligations in a variety of industry-standard respects, including, but not limited to, limitations based on time and geography, and a right to replace an infringing product. The Company also, from time to time, has granted a specific indemnification right to individual customers.
The Company believes its internal development processes and other policies and practices limit its exposure related to such indemnifications. In addition, the Company requires its employees to sign a proprietary information and inventions agreement, which assigns the rights to its employees' development work to the Company. To date, the Company has not had to reimburse any of its distributors or customers for any losses related to these indemnifications and no material claims were outstanding as of December 31, 2017. For several reasons, including the lack of prior indemnification claims and the lack of a monetary liability limit for certain infringement cases, the Company cannot determine the maximum amount of potential future payments, if any, related to such indemnifications.
Adoption of New Accounting Standards
In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, amending the existing accounting standards for revenue recognition. The Company elected to early adopt these standards, effective on January 1, 2017, using the full retrospective method, under which the amendments were applied to all prior periods presented. Under the new standards the Company recognizes all revenue on sales to distributors
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
upon shipment and transfer of control (known as “sell-in” revenue recognition), rather than deferring recognition on sales to certain distributors until the distributors report that they have sold the products to their customers (known as “sell-through” revenue recognition).
The impact of adoption on the Company’s previously reported consolidated financial statements were as follows:
In March 2016, the FASB amended the existing accounting standards for stock-based compensation, ASU 2016-09, Compensation-Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting (ASU 2016-09). The amendments impact several aspects of accounting for share-based payment transactions, including the income tax consequences, forfeitures, classification of awards as either equity or liabilities, and classification on the statement of cash flows. The manner of application varies by the various provisions of the guidance, with certain provisions applied on a retrospective or modified retrospective approach, while others are applied prospectively. The Company adopted the new standards in the first quarter of 2017, effective on January 1, 2017. Upon adoption, the Company recognized a windfall tax benefit of $7.5 million, as a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings, together with a corresponding increase in deferred tax assets.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-04, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other (Topic 350). Under the amendments in this ASU, an entity should perform its annual, or interim, goodwill impairment test by comparing the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount. An entity should recognize an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value; however, the loss recognized should not exceed the total amount of goodwill allocated to that reporting unit. Additionally, an entity should consider income tax effects from any tax deductible goodwill on the carrying amount of the reporting unit when measuring the goodwill impairment loss, if applicable. The Company elected to early adopt the new standards in the fourth quarter of 2017 when the annual goodwill impairment test was performed.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In February 2016, the FASB amended the existing accounting standards for leases, ASU 2016-02, Leases. The amendments require lessees to recognize, on the balance sheet, assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by leases of greater than twelve months. The accounting by lessors will remain largely unchanged from that applied under previous U.S. GAAP. The Company is required to adopt the amendments in the first quarter of fiscal 2019, with early adoption permitted. The amendments require a modified retrospective transition approach to recognize and measure leases at the beginning of the earliest period presented. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of these amendments and the transition alternatives on its consolidated financial statements.
3. COMPONENTS OF THE COMPANY’S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
Accounts Receivable
Inventories
Prepaid Expenses and Other Current Assets
Property and Equipment
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Depreciation expense for property and equipment for fiscal years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, was approximately $18.4 million, $16.8 million and $16.5 million, respectively, and was determined using the straight-line method over the following useful lives:
Total property and equipment (excluding accumulated depreciation) located in the United States at December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, was approximately $159.5 million, $155.1 million and $150.1 million, respectively. In each of 2017, 2016 and 2015, approximately 12% of total property and equipment (excluding accumulated depreciation) was held in Thailand by one of the Company’s subcontractors. No other country held 10% or more of total property and equipment in the periods presented.
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
Changes in accumulated other comprehensive loss for the three years ended December 31, 2017:
_______________
(1)
This component of accumulated other comprehensive loss is included in the computation of net periodic pension cost for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.
4. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS:
ASC 820-10, Fair Value Measurements, clarifies that fair value is an exit price, representing the amount that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants. As such, fair value is a market-based measurement that should be determined based on assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability. As a basis for considering such assumptions, ASC 820-10 establishes a three-tier value hierarchy, which prioritizes the inputs used in measuring fair value as follows: (Level 1) observable inputs such as quoted prices for identical assets in active markets; (Level 2) inputs other than the quoted prices in active markets that are observable either directly or indirectly; and (Level 3) unobservable inputs in which there is little or no market data, which requires the Company to develop its own assumptions. This hierarchy requires the Company to use observable market data, when available, and to minimize the use of unobservable inputs when determining fair value.
The Company’s cash equivalents and investment instruments are classified within Level 1 or Level 2 of the fair-value hierarchy because they are valued using quoted market prices, broker or dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency. The type of instrument valued based on quoted market prices in active markets primarily includes money market securities. This type of instrument is generally classified within Level 1 of the fair-value hierarchy. The types of instruments valued based on other observable inputs (Level 2 of the fair-value hierarchy) include investment-grade corporate bonds and government, state, municipal and provincial obligations. Such types of investments are valued by using a multi-dimensional relational model, the inputs are primarily benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets,
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
benchmark securities, bids, offers, and reference data including market research publications. The Company does not hold any instruments that would be classified within Level 3 of the fair-value hierarchy.
The fair value hierarchy of the Company’s cash equivalents and marketable securities at December 31, 2017, and December 31, 2016, was as follows:
The Company did not transfer any investments between level 1 and level 2 of the fair value hierarchy in the years ended December 31, 2017, and December 31, 2016.
5. MARKETABLE SECURITIES:
Amortized cost and estimated fair market value of marketable securities classified as available-for-sale (excluding cash equivalents) at December 31, 2017, were as follows:
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Amortized cost and estimated fair market value of marketable securities classified as available-for-sale (excluding cash equivalents) at December 31, 2016, were as follows:
The weighted average interest rate of investments at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, was approximately 1.57% and 1.23%, respectively. As of December 31, 2017 and 2016, there were no individual securities that had been in a continuous loss position for 12 months or greater.
6. GOODWILL AND INTANGIBLE ASSETS:
Changes in the carrying amount of goodwill during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, are as follows:
Intangible assets consist primarily of developed technology, acquired licenses, customer relationships, trade name, domain name, in-process R&D and patent rights, and are reported net of accumulated amortization. In January 2015, the Company acquired Cambridge Semiconductor Limited (CamSemi), a UK company, resulting in the addition of the following intangible assets: developed technology of $6.6 million, which is amortized over a period of three - seven years; and customer relationships of $2.4 million, which is amortized over a period of five years. In August 2015, the Company purchased a building with existing third-party leases, resulting in the addition of in-place lease intangible assets of $0.7 million which was amortized over a period of two years.
The Company amortizes the cost of all intangible assets over the shorter of the estimated useful life or the term of the developed technology, acquired licenses, customer relationships, trade name, patent rights and in-place leases, which range from two to twelve years, with the exception of $4.7 million of in-process R&D and $1.3 million paid to acquire an internet domain name. In-process R&D is assessed for impairment until the development is completed and products are available for sale, at which time the Company will begin to amortize the in-process R&D. The Company does not expect the amortization of in-process R&D to begin in 2018. The Company acquired the rights to the internet domain name www.power.com, which is now the Company’s primary domain name; the cost to acquire the domain name has been recorded as an intangible asset and will not be amortized as it has an indefinite useful life. Amortization of acquired intangible assets was approximately $6.1 million, $6.7 million and $7.0 million in the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The Company does not believe there is any significant residual value associated with the following intangible assets:
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The estimated future amortization expense related to definite-lived intangible assets at December 31, 2017, is as follows:
_______________
(1)
The total above excludes $4.7 million of in-process R&D which will be amortized upon completion of development over the estimated useful life of the technology.
7. STOCK PLANS AND SHARE BASED COMPENSATION:
Stock Plans
As of December 31, 2017, the Company had three stock-based compensation plans (the “Plans”) which are described below.
2007 Equity Incentive Plan
The 2007 Equity Incentive Plan (2007 Plan) was adopted by the board of directors on September 10, 2007, and approved by the stockholders on November 7, 2007, as an amendment and restatement of the 1997 Stock Option Plan (1997 Plan). The 2007 Plan provides for the grant of incentive stock options, non-statutory stock options, restricted stock awards, restricted stock unit (RSU) awards, stock appreciation rights, performance-based (PSU) awards, long-term performance based (PRSU) awards and other stock awards to employees, directors and consultants. Pursuant to the 2007 Plan, the exercise price for incentive stock options and non-statutory stock options is generally at least 100% of the fair market value of the underlying shares on the date of grant. Options generally vest over 48 months measured from the date of grant. Options generally expire no later than ten years after the date of grant, subject to earlier termination upon an optionee’s cessation of employment or service. The 2007 Plan expired in September 2017 with no further grants to be made under this plan; however previous grants under this plan shall remain outstanding until they are exercised, vest, forfeited or expire.
Beginning January 27, 2009, grants pursuant to the Directors Equity Compensation Program (which was adopted by the board of directors on January 27, 2009) to non-employee directors have been made primarily under the 2007 Plan. The Directors Equity Compensation Program provides for grants to outside directors as follows: effective annually, upon the first trading day of July, each outside director would receive a grant of an equity award with an aggregate value of $100,000. At each outside director’s election, such award would consist entirely of RSUs or entirely of stock options. The quantity of options would be calculated by dividing $100,000 by the Black-Scholes value on the date of grant. The quantity of RSUs issued would be calculated by dividing $100,000 by the grant date fair value. Further, on the date of election of a new outside director, such new director would receive such grant as continuing outside directors receive on the first trading day of July; provided, however, that such grant is prorated for the portion of the year that such new outside director will serve until the next first trading day of July. The Directors Equity Compensation Program will remain in effect at the discretion of the board of directors or the compensation committee.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
2016 Incentive Award Plan
The 2016 Incentive Award Plan (2016 Plan) was adopted by the board of directors on March 17, 2016 and approved by the stockholders on May 13, 2016. The Plan provides for the grant of RSU awards, PSU awards and PRSU awards. No other forms of equity-based awards, including stock options and stock appreciation rights, may be granted under the Plan. As of December 31, 2017, 35,000 awards have been issued and approximately 1.5 million shares of common stock remain available for future grant under the 2016 Plan. The 2016 Plan also provides for performance-based cash awards that qualify as “performance-based compensation” within the meaning of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code.
1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
Under the 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (Purchase Plan), eligible employees may apply accumulated payroll deductions, which may not exceed 15% of an employee’s compensation, to the purchase of shares of the Company’s common stock at periodic intervals. The purchase price of stock under the Purchase Plan is equal to 85% of the lower of (i) the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the first day of each offering period, or (ii) the fair market value of the Company’s common stock on the purchase date (as defined in the Purchase Plan). Each offering period consists of one purchase period of approximately six months duration. An aggregate of 3.5 million shares of common stock were reserved for issuance to employees under the Purchase Plan. As of December 31, 2017, of the shares reserved for issuance, 3.0 million shares had been purchased and 0.5 million shares were reserved for future issuance under the Purchase Plan.
Shares Reserved
As of December 31, 2017, the Company had approximately 2.0 million shares of common stock reserved for future grant under all stock plans.
Stock-Based Compensation
The Company applies the provisions of ASC 718-10, Stock Compensation. Under the provisions of ASC 718-10, the Company recognizes the fair value of stock-based compensation in its financial statements over the requisite service period of the individual grants, which generally equals a four-year vesting period. The Company uses estimates of volatility, expected term, risk-free interest rate, dividend yield and forfeitures in determining the fair value of these awards and the amount of compensation expense to recognize. The Company uses the straight-line method to amortize all stock awards granted over the requisite service period of the award.
The following table summarizes the stock-based compensation expense recognized in accordance with ASC 718-10 for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
The following table summarizes total compensation expense related to unvested awards not yet recognized, net of expected forfeitures, and the weighted average period over which it is expected to be recognized as of December 31, 2017:
Stock-based compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2017, was approximately $24.7 million (comprising approximately $8.2 million related to performance-based awards, $15.2 million related to restricted stock units and $1.3 million related to the Company’s Purchase Plan).
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Stock-based compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2016, was approximately $20.9 million (comprising approximately $0.2 million related to stock options, $6.4 million related to performance-based awards, $13.0 million related to restricted stock units and $1.3 million related to the Company’s Purchase Plan).
Stock-based compensation expense in the year ended December 31, 2015, was approximately $14.8 million (comprising approximately $0.7 million related to stock options, $0.3 million related to performance-based awards, $12.7 million related to restricted stock units and $1.2 million related to the Company’s Purchase Plan).
The Company did not grant stock options in the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, and therefore no fair-value assumptions are reported.
The fair value of employees’ stock purchase rights under the Purchase Plan was estimated using the Black-Scholes model with the following weighted-average assumptions used during the three years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015:
A summary of stock options outstanding as of December 31, 2017, and activity during three years then ended, is presented below:
The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the year ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, was $8.9 million, $11.5 million and $7.0 million, respectively.
The following table summarizes the stock options outstanding at December 31, 2017:
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
PSU Awards
Under the performance-based awards program, the Company grants awards in the performance year in an amount equal to twice the target number of shares to be issued if the maximum performance metrics are met. The number of shares that are released at the end of the performance year can range from zero to 200% of the target number depending on the Company’s performance. The performance metrics of this program are annual targets consisting of a combination of net revenue, non-GAAP operating earnings and strategic goals.
As the net revenue, non-GAAP operating income and strategic goals are considered performance conditions, expense associated with these awards, net of estimated forfeitures, is recognized over the service period based on an assessment of the achievement of the performance targets. The fair value of these PSUs is determined using the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant, reduced by the discounted present value of dividends expected to be declared before the awards vest. If the performance conditions are not achieved, no compensation cost is recognized and any previously recognized compensation is reversed.
A summary of PSU awards outstanding as of December 31, 2017, and activity during the three years then ended, is presented below:
The grant date fair value of PSU awards released, which were fully vested, in the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 were approximately $4.6 million and $0.6 million, respectively. There were no PSU awards released in the year ended December 31, 2015 (as the Company did not reach its minimum performance goals established for the 2014 PSUs).
PRSU Awards (Long-term Performance Based)
The Company's PRSU program provides for the issuance of PRSUs which will vest based on the Company's performance measured against the PRSU Plan's established revenue targets. The PRSUs were granted in an amount equal to twice the target number of shares to be issued if the maximum performance metrics are met. The actual number of shares the recipient receives is determined at the end of a three-year performance period based on results achieved versus the Company’s performance goals, and may range from zero to 200% of the target number. The performance goals for PRSUs granted in fiscal 2017, 2016 and 2015 were based on the Company’s annual revenue growth over the respective three-year performance period.
Recipients of a PRSU award generally must remain employed by the Company on a continuous basis through the end of the applicable three-year performance period in order to receive shares subject to that award. Expenses associated with these awards, net of estimated forfeitures, are recorded throughout the year depending on the number of shares expected to vest based on progress toward the performance target. The fair value of PRSU awards is determined using the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the grant date, reduced by the discounted present value of dividends expected to be declared before the awards vest. If the performance conditions are not achieved, no compensation cost is recognized and any previously recognized compensation is reversed.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
A summary of PRSU awards outstanding as of December 31, 2017, and activity during the three years then ended, is presented below:
RSU Awards
RSUs granted to employees typically vest ratably over a four-year period, and are converted into shares of the Company’s common stock upon vesting on a one-for-one basis subject to the employee’s continued service to the Company over that period. The fair value of RSUs is determined using the fair value of the Company’s common stock on the date of the grant, reduced by the discounted present value of dividends expected to be declared before the awards vest. Compensation expense is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of each grant adjusted for estimated forfeitures.
A summary of RSU awards outstanding as of December 31, 2017, and activity during the three years then ended, is presented below:
The grant date fair value of RSUs vested in the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, was approximately $13.2 million, $12.2 million and $11.3 million, respectively.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
8. SIGNIFICANT CUSTOMERS AND GEOGRAPHIC NET REVENUES:
Customer Concentration
The Company's top ten customers accounted for approximately 54%, 60% and 61% in 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively. A significant portion of these revenues are attributable to sales of the Company’s products to distributors of electronic components. These distributors sell the Company’s products to a broad, diverse range of end users, including OEMs and merchant power supply manufacturers. Sales to distributors in 2017, 2016 and 2015 were $330.9 million, $292.6 million and $261.4 million, respectively. Direct sales to OEMs and power-supply manufacturers accounted for the remainder.
The following customers, distributors of the Company’s products, each accounted for 10% or more of total net revenues:
_______________
* Total customer revenue was less than 10% of net revenues.
No other customers accounted for 10% or more of the Company’s net revenues in the periods presented.
Concentration of Credit Risk
Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consisted principally of cash investments and trade receivables. The Company does not have any off-balance-sheet credit exposure related to its customers. As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, 64% and 70%, respectively, of accounts receivable were concentrated with the Company’s top ten customers.
The following customer, a distributor of the Company’s products, represented 10% or more of accounts receivable:
No other customers accounted for 10% or more of the Company’s accounts receivable in the periods presented.
Geographic Net Revenues
The Company markets its products globally through its sales personnel and a worldwide network of independent sales representatives and distributors. Geographic net revenues based on “bill to” customer locations were as follows:
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
9. COMMON STOCK REPURCHASES AND CASH DIVIDENDS:
Common Stock Repurchases
Over the years the Company’s board of directors has authorized the use of funds to repurchase shares of the Company’s common stock, including $60.0 million and $30.0 million in 2015 and 2017, respectively, with repurchases to be executed according to pre-defined price/volume guidelines. In 2015, the Company purchased 1.3 million shares for approximately $53.7 million. In 2016, the Company purchased 146,000 shares for approximately $6.4 million. In 2017, the Company purchased 129,000 shares for approximately $9.2 million. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had $44.4 million available for future stock repurchases, which has no expiration date. In January 2018, the Company’s board of directors authorized the use of an additional $30.0 million for the repurchase of the Company’s common stock, with repurchases to be executed according to pre-defined price/volume guidelines. Authorization of future stock repurchase programs is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements and business conditions as well as other factors.
Common Stock Dividend
The following table presents the quarterly dividends declared per share of the Company’s common stock for the periods indicated:
The Company paid a total of approximately $16.6 million, $15.1 million and $13.9 million in cash dividends during 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
In January 2018, the Company’s board of directors declared a $0.16 per share quarterly dividend for each quarter in 2018. The declaration of any future cash dividend is at the discretion of the board of directors and will depend on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, capital requirements, business conditions and other factors, as well as a determination that cash dividends are in the best interest of the Company’s stockholders.
10. EARNINGS PER SHARE:
Basic earnings per share are calculated by dividing net income by the weighted-average shares of common stock outstanding during the period. Diluted earnings per share are calculated by dividing net income by the weighted-average shares of common stock and dilutive common equivalent shares outstanding during the period. Dilutive common equivalent shares included in this calculation consist of dilutive shares issuable upon the assumed exercise of outstanding common stock options, the assumed vesting of outstanding restricted stock units, the assumed issuance of awards under the stock purchase plan and contingently issuable performance-based awards, as computed using the treasury stock method.
A summary of the earnings per share calculation is as follows:
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
_______________
(1)
The Company includes the shares underlying performance-based awards in the calculation of diluted earnings per share if the performance conditions have been satisfied as of the end of the reporting period and excludes such shares when the necessary conditions have not been met. The Company has included in the 2017, 2016 and 2015 calculations those shares that were contingently issuable upon the satisfaction of the performance conditions as of the end of the respective periods.
In the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016, no outstanding stock awards were determined to be anti-dilutive and therefore were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share. In the years ended December 31, 2015, approximately 8,000 outstanding stock awards were determined to be anti-dilutive and therefore were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share.
11. PROVISION FOR INCOME TAXES:
U.S. Tax Reform
The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Tax Act) was enacted on December 22, 2017. The Act reduces the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21%, requires companies to pay a one-time transition tax on earnings of certain foreign subsidiaries that were previously tax deferred and creates new taxes on certain foreign sourced earnings. As of December 31, 2017, the Company has not completed the accounting for the tax effects of enactment of the Tax Act; however, in certain cases, as described below, the Company has made a reasonable estimate of the effects on existing deferred tax balances and the one-time transition tax. In other cases, the Company has not been able to make a reasonable estimate and continues to account for those items based on the Company’s existing accounting policies and positions that were in effect immediately prior to enactment.
The SEC staff issued Staff Accounting Bulletin 118 (SAB 118), which provides guidance on accounting for the tax effects of the Tax Act. SAB 118 provides a measurement period that should not extend beyond one year from the Tax Act enactment date for companies to complete the accounting under ASC 740. In accordance with SAB 118, a company must reflect the income tax effects of those aspects of the Tax Act for which the accounting under ASC 740 is complete. To the extent that a company’s accounting for certain income tax effects of the Tax Act is incomplete but it is able to determine a reasonable estimate, it must record a provisional estimate in the financial statements. If a company cannot determine a provisional estimate to be included in the financial statements, it should continue to apply ASC 740 on the basis of the provisions of the tax laws that were in effect immediately before the enactment of the Tax Act.
The items for which the Company was able to determine a reasonable estimate includes a provisional one-time transition tax of $35.3 million, which was included as a component of the income tax provision for the year-ended December 31, 2017. This one-time transition tax was based on the Company’s total post-1986 earnings and profits (E&P) previously deferred from U.S. income taxes. The Company has not yet completed the calculation of the total post-1986 E&P for these foreign subsidiaries. Further, the transition tax is based in part on the amount of those earnings held in cash and other specified assets. As of December 31, 2017, the Company has no undistributed foreign earnings that would be subject to the transition tax; although, this amount may change upon finalization of the total post-1986 foreign E&P balances and the amounts held in cash or other specified assets.
The Company also re-measured certain deferred tax assets and liabilities based on the rates at which they are expected to reverse in future periods, which is generally 21%. The Company recorded a provisional amount of $4.9 million related to the re-measurement of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities. However, the Company is still analyzing certain aspects of the Tax Act and refining calculations, which could potentially affect the measurement of these balances or potentially give rise to new deferred tax amounts.
The Act also includes provisions for Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income (“GILTI”) wherein taxes on foreign income are imposed in excess of a deemed return on tangible assets of foreign corporations. Due to the complexity of the GILTI tax rules; the Company is continuing to evaluate this provision of the Tax Act and the application of ASC 740. The Company is allowed to make an accounting policy choice of either (1) treating taxes due on future U.S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI as a current-period expense when incurred (the “period cost method”) or (2) factoring such amounts into the Company’s measurement of deferred taxes (the “deferred method”). The Company’s selection of an accounting policy with respect to the new GILTI tax rules will depend, in part, on analyzing the Company’s global income to determine whether the Company expects to have future U.S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI and, if so, what the impact is expected to be. Whether the Company expects to have future U.S. inclusions in taxable income related to GILTI depends on not only the Company’s current structure and estimated future results of global operations but also the Company’s intent and ability to modify the Company’s structure and/or business. The Company is not yet able to reasonably estimate the effect of this provision of the Tax Act. Therefore, the Company has not made any adjustments related to potential GILTI tax in the Company’s financial statements and has not made a policy decision regarding whether to record deferred taxes on GILTI.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Income Taxes
The Company accounts for income taxes under the provisions of ASC 740, Income Taxes. Under the provisions of ASC 740, deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized based on the differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases, utilizing the tax rates that are expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled.
U.S. and foreign components of income before income taxes were:
The components of the provision for income taxes are as follows:
The Company is entitled to a deduction for federal and state tax purposes with respect to employees' stock option activity. The net reduction in taxes otherwise payable in excess of any amount credited to income tax expense has been reflected as an adjustment to the tax provision due to the adoption of ASU 2019-09, Compensation - Stock Compensation, effective January 1, 2017. For additional details on the adoption of ASU 2016-09, refer to Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements, in the Company’s Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2016-09, the net reduction in taxes otherwise payable in excess of any amount credited to income tax expense has been reflected as an adjustment to additional paid-in capital. For 2015, the deficiency arising from employee stock option activity that resulted in an adjustment to additional paid in capital was approximately $0.2 million. No adjustment was recorded in 2016.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
The provision for income taxes differs from the amount that would result by applying the applicable federal income tax rate to income before provision for income taxes, as follows:
The Company’s effective tax rate is impacted by the geographic distribution of the world-wide earnings in lower tax jurisdictions and the federal R&D tax credit. Additionally, in 2017 the Company’s effective tax rate is impacted by a $37.5 million charge resulting from the enactment of the Tax Act.
The components of the net deferred income tax asset (liabilities) were as follows:
_______________
(1)
The reduction of deferred tax assets is primarily due to the utilization of tax attributes for transition tax related to the Tax Act as well as the reduction of the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35% to 21% beginning in 2018.
In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. The ultimate realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the generation of future taxable income during the periods in which those temporary differences become deductible. Management considers the scheduled reversal of deferred tax liabilities and projected future taxable income. In the event that the Company determines, based on available evidence and management judgment, that all or part of the net deferred tax assets will not be realized in the future, the Company would record a valuation allowance in the period the determination is made. In addition, the calculation of tax liabilities involves significant judgment in estimating the impact of uncertainties in the application of complex tax laws. Resolution of these uncertainties in a manner inconsistent with the Company’s expectations could have a material impact on its results of operations and financial position.
As of December 31, 2017, the Company continues to maintain a valuation allowance primarily as a result of capital losses for federal purposes, and on its California deferred tax assets as the Company believes that it is not more likely than not that the deferred tax assets will be fully realized. In addition, the Company maintains a valuation allowance with respect to certain of its deferred tax assets relating to tax credits in Canada and the state of New Jersey.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
As of December 31, 2017, due to the impact of the Tax Act, the Company expects to utilize all federal research and development tax credit carry-forwards and all net operating loss carry-forwards; California research and development tax credit carry-forwards of approximately $21.5 million (there is no expiration of research and development tax credit carry-forwards for the state of California) and California net operating losses of $46.6 million which will begin to expire in 2032. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had Canadian scientific research and experimental development tax credit carry-forwards of approximately $2.4 million and New Jersey research and experimental development tax credit carry-forwards of approximately $0.8 million, which will start to expire in 2030 and 2026, respectively.
Unrecognized Tax Benefits
The Company applies the provisions of ASC 740-10, relating to accounting for uncertain income taxes. Reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits:
The Company's total unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, were $16.7 million, $15.4 million and $13.6 million, respectively. An income tax benefit of $10.3 million, net of valuation allowance adjustments, would be recorded if these unrecognized tax benefits are recognized. The Company cannot reasonably estimate the amount of the unrecognized tax benefit that could be adjusted in the next twelve months.
The Company’s continuing practice is to recognize interest and/or penalties related to income tax matters in income tax expense. The Company had accrued interest and penalties of $0.1 million as of both December 31, 2017, and December 31, 2016, which have been recorded in long-term income taxes payable in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets.
As of December 31, 2017, the Company has concluded all U.S. federal income tax matters for the years through 2012. However, due to tax attributes, the IRS may calculate tax adjustments for subsequent years for positions taken prior to 2012. There is currently no pending income tax audit.
On July 27, 2015, in Altera Corp. v. Commissioner, the U.S. Tax Court issued an opinion related to the treatment of stock-based compensation expense in an intercompany cost-sharing arrangement. A final decision was issued by the Tax Court in December 2015. In February 2016, the Commissioner appealed the Tax Court decision. At this time, the U.S. Department of the Treasury has not withdrawn the requirement to include stock-based compensation expense from IRS cost-sharing regulations. The Company has reviewed this case and its impact and concluded that no adjustment to the consolidated financial statements is appropriate at this time. The Company will continue to monitor ongoing developments and potential impacts to the consolidated financial statements.
12. COMMITMENTS:
Facilities
The Company owns its main executive, administrative, manufacturing and technical offices in San Jose, California. The Company also owns a research and development facility in New Jersey and a test facility in Biel, Switzerland. The Company leases administrative office space in Singapore and Switzerland, and R&D facilities in Canada and the United Kingdom, in addition to sales offices in various countries around the world.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Future minimum lease payments under all non-cancelable operating lease agreements as of December 31, 2017, are as follows:
Total rent expense amounted to $2.0 million, $1.9 million and $2.0 million in the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Purchase Obligations
At December 31, 2017, the Company had no non-cancelable purchase obligations that were due beyond one year.
13. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS AND CONTINGENCIES:
From time to time in the ordinary course of business, the Company becomes involved in lawsuits, or customers and distributors may make claims against the Company. In accordance with ASC 450-10, Contingencies, the Company makes a provision for a liability when it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated.
On October 20, 2004, the Company filed a complaint against Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation (referred to collectively as “Fairchild”) in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. In its complaint, the Company alleged that Fairchild has and is infringing four of Power Integrations’ patents pertaining to pulse width modulation (PWM) integrated circuit devices. Fairchild denied infringement and asked for a declaration from the court that it does not infringe any Power Integrations patent and that the patents are invalid. The Court issued a claim construction order on March 31, 2006 which was favorable to the Company. The Court set a first trial on the issues of infringement, willfulness and damages for October 2, 2006. At the close of the first trial, on October 10, 2006, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the Company finding all asserted claims of all four patents-in-suit to be willfully infringed by Fairchild and awarding $34.0 million in damages. Fairchild raised defenses contending that the asserted patents are invalid or unenforceable, and the Court held a second trial on these issues beginning on September 17, 2007. On September 21, 2007, the jury returned a verdict in the Company’s favor, affirming the validity of the asserted claims of all four patents-in-suit. Fairchild submitted further materials on the issue of enforceability along with various other post-trial motions, and the Company filed post-trial motions seeking a permanent injunction and increased damages and attorneys’ fees, among other things. On September 24, 2008, the Court denied Fairchild’s motion regarding enforceability and ruled that all four patents are enforceable. On December 12, 2008, the Court ruled on the remaining post-trial motions, including granting a permanent injunction, reducing the damages award to $6.1 million, granting Fairchild a new trial on the issue of willful infringement in view of an intervening change in the law, and denying the Company’s motion for increased damages and attorneys’ fees with leave to renew the motion after the resolution of the issue of willful infringement. On December 22, 2008, at Fairchild’s request, the Court temporarily stayed the permanent injunction for 90 days. On January 12, 2009, Fairchild filed a notice of appeal challenging the Court’s refusal to enter a more permanent stay of the injunction, and Fairchild filed additional motions requesting that both the Federal Circuit and the District Court extend the stay of injunction. The District Court temporarily extended the stay pending the Federal Circuit ruling on Fairchild’s pending motion, but the Federal Circuit dismissed Fairchild’s appeal and denied its motion on May 5, 2009, and the District Court issued an order on May 13, 2009 confirming the reinstatement of the permanent injunction as originally entered in December 2008. On June 22, 2009, the Court held a brief bench re-trial on the issue of willful infringement. On July 22, 2010, the Court found that Fairchild willfully infringed all four of the asserted patents, and the Court also invited briefing on enhanced damages and attorneys’ fees. Fairchild also filed a motion requesting that the Court amend its findings regarding willfulness. On January 18, 2011, the Court denied Fairchild’s request to amend the findings regarding Fairchild’s willful infringement and doubled the damages award against Fairchild but declined to award attorneys’ fees. On February 3, 2011, the Court entered final judgment in favor of the Company for a total damages award of $12.9 million. Fairchild filed a notice of appeal challenging the final judgment and a number of the underlying rulings, and the Company filed a cross-appeal seeking to increase the damages award. The appeal was argued on January 11, 2012, and the Federal Circuit issued a mixed ruling on March 26, 2013, affirming Fairchild’s infringement of certain claims that support the basis for the permanent injunction while reversing, vacating, and remanding the findings with respect to other claims, including the Company’s claim for damages. The Company filed a petition seeking Supreme
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
Court review of the Federal Circuit’s ruling on damages issues, and the Supreme Court called for a response from Fairchild but ultimately declined to review the case. On remand, the District Court reinstated the prior findings that Fairchild willfully infringed three of the Company’s patents; the Company intends to pursue its claim for financial compensation based on Fairchild’s infringement.
On May 9, 2005, the Company filed a Complaint with the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, 19 U.S.C. Section 1337 against System General (SG). The Company filed a supplement to the complaint on May 24, 2005. The Company alleged infringement of its patents pertaining to PWM integrated circuit devices produced by SG, which are used in power conversion applications such as power supplies for computer monitors. The Commission instituted an investigation on June 8, 2005 in response to the Company’s complaint. SG filed a response to the ITC complaint asserting that the patents-in-suit were invalid and not infringed. The Company subsequently and voluntarily narrowed the number of patents and claims in suit, which proceeded to a hearing. The hearing on the investigation was held before the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) from January 18 to January 24, 2006. Post-hearing briefs were submitted and briefing concluded February 24, 2006. The ALJ’s initial determination was issued on May 15, 2006. The ALJ found all remaining asserted claims valid and infringed, and recommended the exclusion of the infringing products as well as certain downstream products that contain the infringing products. After further briefing, on June 30, 2006, the Commission decided not to review the initial determination on liability, but did invite briefs on remedy, bonding and the public interest. On August 11, 2006, the Commission issued an order excluding from entry into the United States the infringing SG PWM chips, and any liquid-crystal-display (LCD) computer monitors, AC printer adapters and sample/demonstration circuit boards containing an infringing SG chip. The U.S. Customs Service is authorized to enforce the exclusion order. On October 11, 2006, the presidential review period expired without any action from the President, and the ITC exclusion order is now in full effect. SG appealed the ITC decision, and on November 19, 2007, the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s findings in all respects. On October 27, 2008, SG filed a petition to modify the exclusion order in view of a recent Federal Circuit opinion in an unrelated case, and the Company responded to oppose any modification, but the Commission modified the exclusion order on February 27, 2009. Nevertheless, the exclusion order still prohibits SG and related entities from importing the infringing SG chips and any LCD computer monitors, AC printer adapters, and sample/demonstration circuit boards containing an infringing SG chip.
On May 23, 2008, the Company filed a complaint against Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, and Fairchild’s wholly owned subsidiary System General Corporation (referred to collectively as “Fairchild”), in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. In its complaint, the Company alleged that Fairchild has infringed and is infringing three patents pertaining to power supply controller integrated circuit devices. Fairchild answered the Company’s complaint on November 7, 2008, denying infringement and asking for a declaration from the Court that it does not infringe any Power Integrations patent and that the patents are invalid and unenforceable. Fairchild’s answer also included counterclaims accusing the Company of infringing three patents pertaining to primary side power conversion integrated circuit devices. Fairchild had earlier brought these same claims in a separate suit against the Company, also in Delaware, which Fairchild dismissed in favor of adding its claims to the Company’s already pending suit against Fairchild. The Company has answered Fairchild’s counterclaims, denying infringement and asking for a declaration from the Court that it does not infringe any Fairchild patent and that the Fairchild patents are invalid. Fairchild also filed a motion to stay the case, but the Court denied that motion on December 19, 2008. On March 5, 2009, Fairchild filed a motion for summary judgment to preclude any recovery for post-verdict sales of parts found to infringe in the parties’ other ongoing litigation, described above, and the Company filed its opposition and a cross-motion to preclude Fairchild from re-litigating the issues of infringement and damages for those same products. On June 26, 2009, the Court held a hearing on the parties’ motions, and on July 9, 2009 the Court issued an order denying the parties’ motions but staying proceedings with respect to the products that were found to infringe and which are subject to the injunction in the other Delaware case between the parties pending the entry of final judgment in that case; those products are expected to be addressed in the context of the parties’ remand proceedings following the appeal in their earlier litigation in Delaware, and the remainder of the case is proceeding. On December 18, 2009, the Court issued an order construing certain terms in the asserted claims of the Company’s and Fairchild’s patents in suit. Following the Court’s ruling on claim construction, Fairchild withdrew its claim related to one of its patents and significantly reduced the number of claims asserted for the remaining two patents. The parties thereafter filed and argued a number of motions for summary judgment, and the Court denied the majority of the parties’ motions but granted the Company’s motion to preclude Fairchild from re-arguing validity positions that were rejected in the prior case between the parties. Because the assigned Judge retired at the end of July 2010, the case was re-assigned to a different Judge, and the Court vacated the trial schedule and had the parties provide their input on the appropriate course of action. The Court thereafter set a trial schedule with the jury trial on infringement and validity to begin in July 2011. On April 18, 2011, the Court rescheduled the trial to begin in January 2012, and on June 2, 2011, the Court moved the trial date to April 2012 to permit the parties to address another patent the Company accused Fairchild of infringing. Following a trial in April 2012, the jury returned a verdict finding that Fairchild infringes two of the Company’s patents, that Fairchild has induced others to infringe the Company’s patents, and also upheld the validity of the infringed patents. Of the two remaining counterclaim patents Fairchild asserted in the case, one was found not to be infringed, but the jury found the second patent to be infringed by a limited number of the Company’s products, although the jury further found the Company did not induce infringement by any customers, including customers outside the United States. On March 29, 2013, the District Court denied
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
most of the parties’ post-trial motions on liability but granted the Company’s motion for judgment as a matter of law finding that Fairchild infringed another of the Company’s patents. On April 25, 2013, the Court denied both parties’ motions regarding the unenforceability of each other’s patents. The Company challenged adverse findings on appeal; nevertheless, the Company estimated that even if the verdict on Fairchild’s patent had ultimately been upheld, the sales potentially impacted would have amounted to less than 0.5% of the Company’s revenues. The Company requested an injunction preventing further infringement of its own patents by Fairchild, and Fairchild requested an injunction as well. Following a hearing on the issue in June 2014, the Court denied Fairchild’s request for an injunction against the Company and granted the Company’s request for an injunction against Fairchild. On January 13, 2015, the District Court entered final judgment on the liability and validity issues discussed above, and both parties filed appeals with the Federal Circuit. After briefing was completed, oral argument on the appeal took place in early July 2016, and on December 12, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in the appeal, overturning the lone infringement verdict against the Company, finding one of the Company’s patents invalid, and overturning the District Court’s jury instruction on inducement. In view of the Federal Circuit’s rejection of the District Court’s jury instruction on inducement, the Court also vacated the inducement findings and associated injunction against Fairchild and remanded the case for a retrial on inducement, but the underlying validity and infringement findings against Fairchild on those two patents remain intact. On remand, the Company will also be seeking financial damages as well as enhanced damages for Fairchild’s willful infringement.
On June 28, 2004, the Company filed a complaint for patent infringement in the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, against SG Corporation, a Taiwanese company, and its U.S. subsidiary. The Company’s complaint alleged that certain integrated circuits produced by SG infringed and continue to infringe certain of its patents. On June 10, 2005, in response to the initiation of the International Trade Commission (ITC) investigation discussed above, the District Court stayed all proceedings. Subsequent to the completion of the ITC proceedings, the District Court temporarily lifted the stay and scheduled a case management conference. On December 6, 2006, SG filed a notice of appeal of the ITC decision as discussed above. In response, and by agreement of the parties, the District Court vacated the scheduled case management conference and renewed the stay of proceedings pending the outcome of the Federal Circuit appeal of the ITC determination. On November 19, 2007, the Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s findings in all respects, and SG did not file a petition for review. The parties subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the District Court case without prejudice. On November 4, 2009, the Company re-filed its complaint for patent infringement against SG and its parent corporations, Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc. and Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, to address their continued infringement of patents at issue in the original suit that recently emerged from SG requested reexamination proceedings before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). The Company seeks, among other things, an order enjoining SG and Fairchild from infringing the Company’s patents and an award of damages resulting from the alleged infringement. Fairchild has denied infringement and asked for a declaration from the Court that it does not infringe any Power Integrations patent, that the patents are invalid, and that one of the two of the Company’s patents now at issue in the case is unenforceable. On May 5, 2010, SG and Fairchild filed an amended answer including counterclaims accusing the Company of infringing two patents, and since that time Fairchild has withdrawn its claim for infringement of one of the patents it originally asserted against the Company but added another patent to the case over the Company’s objections; the Company contests these claims vigorously. Both parties filed summary judgment motions and challenges to each other’s experts’ testimony, and the Court granted the Company’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement with respect to one of Fairchild’s two patents. Following a trial on the remaining claims in February 2014, the jury returned a verdict in the Company’s favor, affirming the validity of the asserted claims of the Company’s patents-in-suit, finding that SG and Fairchild infringed the Company’s asserted patents and induced infringement by others, and awarding $105.0 million in damages. The Jury also rejected Fairchild’s remaining counterclaims for infringement against the Company. Fairchild challenged these rulings in post-trial motions, but the judge confirmed the jury’s determinations on infringement and damages, although the Court declined to find Fairchild’s infringement willful. Fairchild also pressed its unenforceability claim with respect to one of the two patents it was found to infringe in post-trial briefing, but the Court rejected Fairchild’s unenforceability claim. Fairchild also requested reconsideration of the damages determinations, and the Court granted a new trial with respect to damages but none of the other issues addressed in the previous trial, with the retrial scheduled for December 2015. Thereafter, the parties completed pretrial proceedings challenging each other’s experts, and the Court granted portions of each party’s motions limiting the scope of expert testimony for purposes of the damages retrial, but neither party was successful in their efforts to prevent the other side’s experts from testifying at trial. Following a retrial on the issue of damages in December 2015, the jury returned a verdict in the Company’s favor, finding that the Company’s patented technology created the basis for customer demand for the infringing Fairchild products and awarding $139.8 million in damages. Although the jury awarded damages, at this stage of the proceedings the Company cannot state the amount, if any, it might ultimately recover from Fairchild, and no benefits have been recorded in the Company’s consolidated financial statements as a result of the damages verdict. Fairchild filed post-trial motions challenging the verdict, but the Court rejected Fairchild’s motions challenging the damages verdict in August 2016. The Company also filed motions requesting enhanced damages and attorney fees and reinstatement of the willfulness finding against Fairchild in view of an intervening change of law; on January 13, 2017, the District Court reinstated the finding that Fairchild’s infringement was willful but declined to enhance damages or award fees. In January 2017, Fairchild filed a further challenge to the verdict, but the Court rejected Fairchild’s motion and entered a final judgment of
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
$146.5 million after factoring in pre-judgment interest. Fairchild’s appeal on the merits is under way, with briefing now completed and oral argument expected in the coming months and a ruling to follow thereafter.
In February 2010, Fairchild and System General (SG) filed suits for patent infringement against the Company, Power Integrations Netherlands B.V., and representative offices of Power Integrations Netherlands in Shanghai and Shenzhen with the Suzhou Intermediate Court in the People’s Republic of China. The suits asserted four Chinese patents and sought an injunction and damages of approximately $19.0 million. Power Integrations Netherlands filed invalidation proceedings for all four asserted SG patents in the People’s Republic of China Patent Reexamination Board (PRB) of the State Intellectual Property Office (SIPO), and all four challenges were accepted by the PRB, with hearings conducted in September 2010. In early January 2012, the Company received rulings from the PRB invalidating the majority of the claims Fairchild asserted in litigation. The Suzhou Court conducted evidentiary hearings in 2012 and issued rulings in late December 2012, finding that the Company did not infringe any of the asserted patents. Fairchild filed appeals challenging the Suzhou Court’s non-infringement rulings, and the appeals court in Nanjing held further hearings in the infringement proceedings in late 2014, but Fairchild has since dismissed its appeals, bringing the infringement proceedings to a close in the first quarter of 2015.
On July 11, 2011, the Company filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia, against David Kappos in his capacity as Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) as part of the ongoing reexamination proceedings related to one of the patents asserted against Fairchild and SG in the Delaware litigation described above. The Company filed a motion for summary judgment on a preliminary jurisdictional issue, and the PTO filed a cross-motion to dismiss on this same issue; briefing on those motions was completed in October, 2011. On November 18, 2013, the Court granted the PTO’s motion and transferred the case to the Federal Circuit, where additional briefing took place. Following a hearing in May 2015, the Federal Circuit ruled in the Company’s favor on August 12, 2015, overturning the PTO’s claim construction and remanding the case for further proceedings. On remand, the PTO ignored the Federal Circuit’s guidance, so the Company has filed another appeal to the Federal Circuit; briefing and oral argument on the second appeal are now complete, with a ruling expected in the coming months.
On May 1, 2012, Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation and Fairchild's wholly owned subsidiary, System General Corporation (referred to collectively as “Fairchild”), filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. In its complaint, Fairchild alleged that the Company has infringed and is infringing four patents pertaining to power conversion integrated circuit devices. The Company answered Fairchild’s complaint, denying infringement and asking for a declaration from the Court that it does not infringe any Fairchild patent and that the Fairchild patents are invalid, and the Company also asserted counterclaims against Fairchild for infringement of five of the Company’s patents. Fairchild withdrew its claim for infringement of one of the patents it asserted against the Company after the Company’s preliminary challenge. The parties streamlined their contentions in view of the Court’s pretrial rulings, and following a trial in late May and early June 2015, a jury returned a verdict finding that Fairchild infringed one of the Company’s patents, that Fairchild has induced and contributed to others’ infringement of the Company’s patent, and that the Company induced infringement of a Fairchild patent that was previously found infringed in the 2012 trial described above, with a damages award of $2.4 million in favor of Fairchild. Both parties filed post-trial motions and challenges to various portions of the jury verdicts, and the Court addressed the first wave of post-trial motions, denying each side’s challenges to the verdict and denying Fairchild’s request for an injunction. In parallel proceedings, the Federal Circuit overturned the underlying finding of infringement against the Company on the Fairchild patent-in-suit, and the Company moved to vacate the inducement and damages judgment against the Company, a motion that Fairchild did not oppose. Further proceedings and an appeal of the outstanding issues are expected in the coming months.
On October 21, 2015, the Company filed a complaint for patent infringement against Fairchild Semiconductor Corporation, Fairchild Semiconductor International, Inc., and wholly-owned subsidiary Fairchild (Taiwan) Corporation (referred to collectively as “Fairchild”) to address Fairchild’s continued infringement of two patents Fairchild was previously found to infringe in the three District Court cases the Company brought against Fairchild discussed above. In each of the three prior cases, Fairchild was found to infringe one of the patents at issue in the latest complaint, and Fairchild’s challenges to the validity of the patents were rejected during the course of the prior lawsuits as well. Fairchild has answered the Company’s complaint, denying infringement and asking for a declaration from the Court that it does not infringe any Power Integrations patent and that the patents are invalid. Fairchild’s answer also included counterclaims accusing the Company of infringing four patents pertaining to power conversion integrated circuit devices, including one patent the Company was found not to infringe in prior litigation. The Company has answered Fairchild’s counterclaims, denying infringement and asking for a declaration from the Court that it does not infringe any Fairchild patent and that the Fairchild patents are invalid. On December 15, 2016, the Court stayed the case pending resolution of the parties’ inter partes review (IPR) and reexamination proceedings regarding the patents-in-suit.
On March 10, 2016, Silver Star Capital, LLC filed a petition with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) requesting that the PTO conduct an IPR of the validity of the Company’s U.S. Patent No. 6,212,079 (the ’079 patent), which the Company has asserted against Fairchild Semiconductor in the California litigation initiated in 2004, as discussed above. The Company’s ’079 patent is also asserted in the Company’s most recent lawsuits against Fairchild filed in October 2015 and against ON Semiconductor
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
filed in November 2016, also discussed herein. On March 29, 2016, ON Semiconductor Corporation filed another petition requesting inter partes review of the Company’s ‘079 patent. Since that time, ON Semiconductor filed eleven more IPR petitions requesting review of various patents that the Company previously asserted against Fairchild as described above, and another three IPR petitions requesting review of various patents that the Company asserted against ON Semiconductor as described herein. The PTO denied Silver Star Capital’s IPR petition on the ‘079 patent but instituted IPR proceedings with respect to ON Semiconductor’s petition directed to the ‘079 patent. On September 22, 2017, the PTO rejected as obvious the claims of the Company’s ‘079 patent that were asserted in litigation and which form the basis for the $146.5 million judgment against Fairchild; an appeal to reverse the PTO’s adverse findings is expected in the coming months. The PTO also instituted IPR proceedings in response to eight of ON Semiconductor’s eleven other petitions challenging patents previously asserted against Fairchild, denying institution in three cases, and the PTO has rejected a number of claims in the context of these ongoing proceedings. In one case, the PTO rejected as anticipated the claims of the Company’s U.S. Patent No. 6,538,908 that were asserted in litigation against Fairchild; an appeal is expected in the coming months, and further proceedings and the PTO’s initial rulings on other IPRs are expected in the coming months as well. Although the validity of many of the Company’s challenged patents has previously been confirmed in the Company’s District Court litigation with Fairchild and in many cases in prior PTO reexamination proceedings as well, and though the Company intends to vigorously defend the validity of its patents, the outcome of the IPR proceedings is uncertain.
On April 1, 2016, Opticurrent, LLC filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. In its complaint, Opticurrent alleges that the Company has infringed and is infringing one patent pertaining to transistor switch devices. The Company filed a motion to transfer the case to California, which the Court granted, and the case was assigned to a new judge in San Francisco following the transfer. Further proceedings and summary judgment briefing are expected over the course of the coming months, with trial scheduled for February 2019. The Company intends to vigorously defend itself against Opticurrent’s claims.
On August 11, 2016, ON Semiconductor filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. In its complaint, ON Semiconductor alleged that the Company has infringed and is infringing six patents and requested injunctive relief. The Company filed a motion to transfer the case to the Northern District of California, which the Court granted, and the case has been consolidated with the Company’s affirmative case against ON Semiconductor in the Northern District of California, as discussed below. The Company believes it has valid defenses and intends to vigorously defend itself against ON Semiconductor’s claims.
On November 1, 2016, the Company filed a lawsuit against ON Semiconductor in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California to address ON Semiconductor’s infringement of six patents. The court denied ON Semiconductor’s motion requesting that the case be transferred to Arizona and scheduled trial for December of 2019, with interim deadlines for hearing claim construction and dispositive motions. In consolidating the pleadings from the California and Arizona cases following the transfer of ON Semiconductor’s case from Arizona, ON Semiconductor asserted two additional patents, bringing the total number of patents asserted against the Company to eight in this case, and ON Semiconductor’s amended complaint also seeks a declaration of non-infringement with respect to another of the Company’s patents that was previously asserted against Fairchild Semiconductor. Further proceedings and discovery will take place over the coming months.
On December 27, 2016, ON Semiconductor filed a complaint against the Company in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. In its complaint, ON Semiconductor alleges that the Company has infringed and is infringing six patents and requests injunctive relief. On March 9, 2017, ON Semiconductor dismissed its Texas complaint and re-filed a substantially similar complaint in the District of Delaware. After the Company filed a motion to dismiss, ON Semiconductor filed an amended complaint; the Company has answered ON Semiconductor’s complaint and asserted claims for infringement of seven of the Company’s patents. Trial has been scheduled for February of 2020, with interim deadlines for discovery and claim construction, and the Company believes it has valid defenses and intends to vigorously defend itself against ON Semiconductor’s claims.
In November 2017, ON Semiconductor filed suit against the Company in Taiwan charging the Company with infringing three Taiwanese patents and seeking an injunction and damages of approximately $1.0 million. No schedule has been set for the case at this preliminary stage, but the Company believes it has valid defenses and intends to vigorously defend itself against ON Semiconductor’s claims.
The Company is unable to predict the outcome of legal proceedings with certainty, and there can be no assurance that Power Integrations will prevail in the above-mentioned unsettled litigations. These litigations, whether or not determined in Power Integrations’ favor or settled, will be costly and will divert the efforts and attention of the Company’s management and technical personnel from normal business operations, potentially causing a material adverse effect on the business, financial condition and operating results. Currently, the Company is not able to estimate a loss or a range of loss for the ongoing litigation disclosed above, however adverse determinations in litigation could result in monetary losses, the loss of proprietary rights, subject the Company to
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
significant liabilities, require Power Integrations to seek licenses from third parties or prevent the Company from licensing the technology, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and operating results.
14. ACQUISITIONS:
Cambridge Semiconductor Limited
On January 2, 2015, the Company acquired 100% of the shares outstanding of Cambridge Semiconductor Limited (CamSemi) for total consideration of approximately $23.3 million, of which $16.7 million was paid in cash and $6.6 million was applied against an outstanding loan owed to the Company. The acquisition-related costs for the purchase of CamSemi totaled $1.0 million, with $0.8 million recognized in 2014 and $0.2 million recognized in 2015.
CamSemi was acquired to accelerate the Company’s product development efforts for the low-power market. The acquisition also broadens the Company’s technology and product portfolio for low-power applications, particularly in the mobility and LED lighting markets. The purchase price allocated to goodwill in the acquisition (as noted in the purchase price allocation below) is related largely to synergies and economies of scale expected from combining the operations of CamSemi with those of the Company.
The following table summarizes the purchase price and estimated fair values of the assets acquired and the liabilities assumed as of January 2, 2015, the completion of the acquisition of CamSemi:
The following table represents details of the purchased intangible assets:
The fair value of the identifiable intangible assets were determined based on the following approach.
Developed Technology. The income approach was used to value the acquired developed technology. Revenue attributable to the Company’s technology was estimated based on expected evolution of the technology over time. Expenses were assumed to reflect the costs necessary to support the developed technology. The present value was capitalized as developed technology as of the acquisition date and is being amortized using a straight-line method to cost of revenues over the estimated life of 3 - 7 years.
Customer Relationships. An intangible customer relationship asset was recognized to the extent that the Company was expected to benefit from future revenues reasonably anticipated given the historical customer relationships and operating practices of CamSemi. In order to determine the fair value of the customer relationships, the Company’s analysis assumed that the Company would immediately benefit from the economics generated by CamSemi’s existing customer relationships. This amount was reduced
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
by the potential impact given no past customer relationships and the assumption that the Company could reacquire the customer relationships and ramp up to a similar level of revenue within two years. The fair value of customer relationships was capitalized as of the acquisition date and is being amortized on a straight line basis to sales and marketing expenses over the estimated life of 5 years.
Pro forma results of operations for this acquisition have not been presented because it is not material to the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Corporate Headquarters Building
In August 2015, the Company purchased a building adjacent to its corporate headquarters in San Jose, California to support the continued growth of the business. The purchase has been accounted for using the acquisition method of accounting in accordance with ASC 805, Business Combinations, as the building had existing rental income resulting from in-place lease agreements with third-party tenants. The aggregate purchase price of $10.4 million, funded with cash on hand, was allocated as follows: $3.5 million for land, $6.3 million for building and improvements, $0.7 million for in-place leases and $(0.1) million for liabilities assumed. The building and improvements are being depreciated on a straight-line basis over an estimated useful life of up to 30 years. Additionally, as a result of the purchase, the Company acquired existing third-party leases that were valued as in-place lease intangible assets and are being amortized over the weighted average estimated life of two years. The valuation of the acquired in-place leases were estimated by the Company based on the amount of avoided cash outflows necessary to originate such leases. Acquisition-related costs in connection with the building purchase were included in other income in the consolidated statements of income and were not material for the periods presented.
Rental income from third-party leases, and the proportionate share of building expenses for those leases, are included in other income in the consolidated statements of income from the date of acquisition. These amounts were not material for the periods presented.
15. RETIREMENT PLANS:
The Company sponsors a defined benefit pension plan (Pension Plan) for its Swiss subsidiary in accordance with the legal requirements of Switzerland. The plan assets, which provide benefits in the event of an employee’s retirement, death or disability, are held in legally autonomous trustee-administered funds that are subject to Swiss law. Benefits are based on the employee’s age, years of service and salary, and the plan is financed by contributions by both the employee and the Company.
The net periodic benefit cost of the Pension Plan was not material to the Company's financial statements during the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015. At December 31, 2017, the projected benefit obligation was $10.6 million, the plan assets were $6.8 million and the net pension liability was $3.8 million. As of December 31, 2016, the projected benefit obligation was $11.8 million, the plan assets were $7.9 million, and the net pension liability was $3.9 million. The Company has recorded the unfunded amount as a liability in its consolidated balance sheet at December 31, 2017 and 2016, under the other liabilities caption. The Company expects to make contributions to the Pension Plan of approximately $0.3 million during 2018. The unrealized actuarial loss on pension benefits, net of tax at December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 was $1.2 million, $1.9 million and $1.6 million, respectively. These amounts were reflected in Note 3 above under the caption “accumulated other comprehensive loss.”
In accordance with the Compensation-Retirement Benefits Topic of ASC 715-20, Defined Benefits Plan, the Company recognizes the over-funded or under-funded status of its defined post-retirement plan as an asset or liability in its statement of financial position. The company measured the plan assets and benefit obligations as of the date of the fiscal year-end.
16. BANK LINE OF CREDIT:
On July 27, 2016, the Company entered into a credit agreement with a bank (the "Credit Agreement") that provides the Company with a $75.0 million revolving line of credit to use for general corporate purposes with a $20.0 million sub-limit for the issuance of standby and trade letters of credit. The Company’s ability to borrow under the revolving line of credit is conditioned upon the Company’s compliance with specified covenants, including reporting and financial covenants, primarily a minimum cash requirement and a debt to earnings ratio. The Credit Agreement terminates on July 26, 2019; all advances under the revolving line of credit will become due on such date, or earlier in the event of a default. As of December 31, 2017, the Company was compliant with all covenants and had no amount outstanding under the Credit Agreement.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (Continued)
17. SELECTED QUARTERLY INFORMATION (Unaudited):
The following tables set forth certain data from the Company's consolidated statements of income for each of the quarters in the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.
The unaudited quarterly consolidated financial statements have been prepared on the same basis as the audited consolidated financial statements contained herein and include all adjustments that the Company considers necessary for a fair presentation of such information when read in conjunction with the Company’s annual audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this report. The operating results for any quarter are not necessarily indicative of the results for any subsequent period or for the entire fiscal year.
_______________
(1)
In December 2017 the U.S. government enacted comprehensive tax legislation commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (Refer to Note 11, Provision for Income Taxes, in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements).
Schedule II
Valuation and Qualifying Accounts
The Company maintains an allowance for the distributors’ ship and debit credits relating to the sell-through of the Company’s products. This reserve is established using the Company’s historical ship and debit amounts and levels of inventory in the distributor channels.
The following is a summary of the activity in the allowance for ship and debit credits:
_______________
(1)
Deductions relate to ship and debit credits issued which adjust the sell-in price from the standard distribution price to the pre-approved lower price. Refer to Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies and Recent Accounting Pronouncements, for the Company’s revenue recognition policy, including the Company’s accounting for ship and debit claims.
Item 9.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.
Not applicable.
Item 9A.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures.
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures
Management is required to evaluate our disclosure controls and procedures, as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. Disclosure controls and procedures are controls and other procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed under the Exchange Act, such as this Annual Report on Form 10-K, is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission's rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include controls and procedures designed to provide reasonable assurance that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Our disclosure controls and procedures include components of our internal control over financial reporting, which consists of control processes designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of our financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. To the extent that components of our internal control over financial reporting are included within our disclosure controls and procedures, they are included in the scope of our periodic controls evaluation. Based on our management's evaluation (with the participation of our principal executive officer and principal financial officer), our principal executive officer and principal financial officer have concluded that our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Exchange Act) were effective as of the end of the period covered by this report.
Management’s Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act. Internal control over financial reporting is designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
•
pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of our assets;
•
provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and that receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of our management and directors; and
•
provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Internal control over financial reporting cannot provide absolute assurance of achieving financial reporting objectives because of its inherent limitations. Internal control over financial reporting is a process that involves human diligence and compliance and is subject to lapses in judgment and breakdowns resulting from human failures. Because of such limitations, there is a risk that material misstatements may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis by internal control over financial reporting.
Management conducted an assessment of Power Integrations' internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on the framework established by the Committee of Sponsoring Organization (COSO) of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control - Integrated Framework issued in 2013. Based on this assessment, management concluded that, as of December 31, 2017, our internal control over financial reporting was effective.
The effectiveness of Power Integrations' internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, has been audited by Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears below.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting during the fourth quarter of 2017, which were identified in connection with management’s evaluation required by paragraph (d) of Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 under the Exchange Act, that have materially affected or are reasonably likely to materially affect our internal control over financial reporting.
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
To the Stockholders and the Board of Directors of Power Integrations, Inc.
Opinion on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
We have audited the internal control over financial reporting of Power Integrations, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). In our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by COSO.
We have also audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB), the consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, of the Company and our report dated February 14, 2018 expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.
Basis for Opinion
The Company’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit. We are a public accounting firm registered with the PCAOB and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
San Jose, California
February 14, 2018
Item 9B.
Item 9B. Other Information.
Compensation Matters
On February 13, 2018, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of Power Integrations, Inc. (the “Company”) took the following compensation actions with respect to the Company’s chief executive officer, chief financial officer, and other “named executive officers” as defined in Rule 402 of SEC Regulation S-K (collectively, the “Officers”).
2018 Performance-based Incentive Plan
Approved the 2018 Performance-based Incentive Plan (the “2018 PSU Plan”) as follows:
Each officer, as described below, was granted performance stock units, referred to as “PSUs,” which will vest (referred to as a “payout” below) based on Company performance as against the 2018 PSU Plan’s established net revenue targets, non-GAAP operating income targets and strategic goals, each as established by the Compensation Committee. The 2018 target net revenue and non-GAAP operating income levels are intended to have difficulty in attainment levels consistent with the Company’s 2017 PSU Plan.
The portion of the performance stock units granted under the 2018 PSU Plan that will vest will be calculated independently for each of its net revenue, non-GAAP operating income and strategic goals components. “Net revenue” is as set forth in the Company’s annual report for 2018 to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). “Non-GAAP operating income” means operating income for 2018 determined in accordance with GAAP but excluding the following items: (i) stock-based compensation expenses recorded under Accounting Standards Codification 718; (ii) amortization of acquisition-related intangible assets, and the fair-value write-up of acquired inventory; (iii) any other mergers and acquisitions related expenses; and (iv) any other adjustment made to arrive at the Company’s non-GAAP financial information as presented in the Company’s SEC filings. Further, in the event of any mergers, acquisitions or divestitures, or any patent or other litigation settlements or judgments, during the performance period, the net revenue and non-GAAP operating income targets shall be adjusted based on a revised plan approved by the Board of Directors. The strategic goals component is made up of five different strategic goals for the Company.
Weighting of the target components is as follows:
Net Revenue Component of the 2018 PSU Plan:
No payout will be made under the net revenue component of the 2018 PSU Plan if the Company’s 2018 actual net revenue does not exceed at least the established minimum amount of net revenue as set forth in the 2018 PSU Plan. To the extent 2018 actual net revenue is above the minimum amount of net revenue, the payout increases linearly from zero at the minimum amount of net revenue as set forth in the 2018 PSU Plan up to 100% of the net revenue component of the target when actual net revenue equals target net revenue in the 2018 PSU Plan. If 2018 actual net revenue is above the target amount of net revenue, then the payout for performance above target increases linearly from the target amount up to a maximum of 200% of the net revenue component of the target when actual net revenue equals or exceeds the established target to achieve the maximum amount payout under the net revenue component of the 2018 PSU Plan.
Non-GAAP Operating Income Component of the 2018 PSU Plan:
No payout will be made under the non-GAAP operating income component of the 2018 PSU Plan if the Company’s 2018 actual non-GAAP operating income does not exceed at least the established minimum amount of non-GAAP operating income as set forth in the 2018 PSU Plan. To the extent 2018 actual non-GAAP operating income is above the minimum amount of non-GAAP operating income, the payout increases linearly from zero at the minimum amount of non-GAAP operating income as set forth in the 2018 PSU Plan up to 100% of the non-GAAP operating income component of the target when actual non-GAAP operating income equals target non-GAAP operating income in the 2018 PSU Plan. If 2018 actual non-GAAP operating income is above the target amount of non-GAAP operating income, then the payout for performance above target increases linearly from the target amount up to a maximum of 200% of the non-GAAP operating income component of the target when actual non-GAAP operating income equals or exceeds the established target to achieve the maximum amount payout under the non-GAAP operating income component of the 2018 PSU Plan.
Strategic Goals Component of the 2018 PSU Plan:
Each of the five goals in the strategic goals component of the 2018 PSU Plan is assigned a percentage, which percentages range from 2.5% to 20%, and which collectively add up to 30%. If the Company’s 2018 actual achievement of a goal does not exceed
at least the established minimum requirement for a particular goal, then no amount is earned for that goal. To the extent 2018 actual performance for a goal is better than the established minimum for the goal, then the payout increases linearly from zero at the minimum amount of performance as set forth in the 2018 PSU Plan up to 100% of the amount for that goal when actual performance equals target performance for that goal in the 2018 PSU Plan. To the extent 2018 actual performance for a goal is better than the established target for the goal, then the payout for performance above target increasing linearly from the target amount actual performance, up to a maximum of 200% for the specific goal when actual performance equals or exceeds the established target to achieve the maximum payout under the specific goal as set forth in the 2018 PSU Plan.
2018 Target Performance Stock Units
Approved the 2018 target performance stock units for the Officers as follows:
The actual number of shares subject to the performance stock units is twice the target level shown in the table above to enable the payout of up to 200% of the target amount if the actual net revenue, non-GAAP operating income and strategic goals achievement equal or exceed the established levels to achieve the maximum amount of the 2018 PSU Plan.
2018 Restricted Stock Unit Grants
Approved restricted stock unit, referred to as RSU, grants to the following Officers:
The RSU grants will be effective on the grant date. Twenty-five percent (25%) of the RSUs vest on the one year anniversary of the vesting commencement date (as specified in the Officers’ RSU award agreements), and an additional twenty-five percent (25%) of the RSUs vest annually over the next three (3) years thereafter, subject to the respective Officer’s continuous service.
2018 Long-term Performance-based Incentive Plan
Approved the 2018 Long-term Performance-based Incentive Plan (“2018 PRSU Plan”) as follows:
Each officer, as described below, was granted long term performance stock units, referred to as “PRSUs,” which will vest (referred to as a “payout” below) based on Company performance as against the 2018 PRSU Plan’s established 2020 net revenue target, as established by the Compensation Committee. The 2020 net revenue target level is intended to have a difficulty in attainment level consistent with the Company’s 2017 PRSU Plan target net revenue level. The portion of the performance stock units that will vest will be calculated based on the Company’s 2020 net revenue and awarded in early 2021 upon approval by the Compensation Committee. “Net revenue” is as set forth in the Company’s annual report for 2020 to be filed with the SEC. Further, in the event of any mergers, acquisitions or divestitures, or any patent or other litigation settlements or judgments, during the performance period, the net revenue target shall be adjusted based on a revised plan approved by the Board of Directors.
No payout will be made in early 2021 under the 2018 PRSU Plan if the Company’s 2020 actual net revenue does not exceed at least the established minimum amount of net revenue as set forth in the 2018 PRSU Plan. To the extent 2020 actual net revenue is above the minimum amount of net revenue, the payout increases linearly from zero at the minimum amount of net revenue as set forth in the 2018 PRSU Plan up to 100% of the net revenue component of the target when actual net revenue equals target net revenue in the 2018 PRSU Plan. If 2020 actual net revenue is above the target amount of net revenue, then the payout for performance above target increases linearly from the target amount up to a maximum of 200% of the net revenue component of the target when actual net revenue equals or exceeds the established target to achieve the maximum amount payout under the 2018 PRSU Plan. Except to the extent provided in the executive officer benefits agreements between the Company and each Officer, each Officer must be employed through the end of the performance period to receive stock pursuant to the PRSUs under the 2018 PRSU Plan.
2018 Target PRSUs
Approved the target 2018 PRSUs for the Officers as follows:
The actual number of shares subject to the PRSUs is twice the target level shown in the table above to enable the payout of up to 200% of the target amount if actual net revenue equals or exceeds the established level to achieve the maximum amount of the 2018 PRSU Plan.
2018 Salaries
Approved the 2018 salaries for the Officers, to be effective March 26, 2018, as follows:
PART III
Item 10.
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.
The names of our executive officers and their ages, titles and biographies as of the date hereof are incorporated by reference from Part I, Item 1, above.
The following information is included in our Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement to be filed within 120 days after our fiscal year end of December 31, 2017, or the Proxy Statement, and is incorporated herein by reference:
•
Information regarding our directors and any persons nominated to become a director is set forth under the caption “Proposal 1 Election of Directors.”
•
Information regarding our audit committee and our designated “audit committee financial expert” is set forth under the captions “Information Regarding the Board and its Committees” and “Audit Committee” under “Proposal 1 Election of Directors” and “Report of the Audit Committee of the Board.”
•
Information on our code of business conduct and ethics for directors, officers and employees is set forth under the caption “Code of Business Conduct and Ethics” under “Proposal 1 Election of Directors.”
•
Information regarding Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting compliance is set forth under the caption “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.”
•
Information regarding procedures by which stockholders may recommend nominees to our board of directors is set forth under the caption “Nominating and Governance Committee” under “Proposal 1 Election of Directors.”
Item 11.
Item 11. Executive Compensation.
Information regarding compensation of our named executive officers is set forth under the caption “Compensation of Executive Officers” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Information regarding compensation of our directors is set forth under the caption “Compensation of Directors” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Information relating to compensation policies and practices as they relate to risk management is set forth under the caption “Compensation Policies and Practices as They Relate to Risk Management” under “Proposal 1 Election of Directors” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Information regarding compensation committee interlocks is set forth under the caption "Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation" in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
The Compensation Committee Report is set forth under the caption “Compensation Committee Report” in the Proxy Statement, which report is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 12.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.
Information regarding security ownership of certain beneficial owners, directors and executive officers is set forth under the caption “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Information regarding our equity compensation plans, including both stockholder approved plans and non-stockholder approved plans, is set forth under the caption “Equity Compensation Plan Information” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 13.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.
Information regarding certain relationships and related transactions is set forth under the caption “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Information regarding director independence is set forth under the caption “Proposal 1 - Election of Directors” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
Item 14.
Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services.
Information regarding principal auditor fees and services is set forth under “Principal Accountant Fees and Services” in the Proposal with the caption “Ratification of Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the Proxy Statement, which information is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
Item 15.
Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules
(a)
1.
The financial statements required by Item 15(a) are included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
2.
The financial statement schedule required by Item 15(a) (Schedule II, Valuation and Qualifying Accounts) is included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
All other schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.
(b)
Exhibits
All references in the table above to previously filed documents or descriptions are incorporating those documents and descriptions by reference thereto.
_____________
†
This Exhibit has been filed separately with the Commission pursuant to an application for confidential treatment. The confidential portions of this Exhibit have been omitted and are marked by an asterisk.
*
Indicates a management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.
**
The certifications attached as Exhibits 32.1 and 32.2 accompanying this Form 10-K, are not deemed filed with the SEC, and are not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Power Integrations, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the date of this Form 10-K, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Item 16. Form 10-K Summary
Not provided.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC.
Dated:
February 14, 2018
By:
/s/ SANDEEP NAYYAR
Sandeep Nayyar
Chief Financial Officer (Duly Authorized Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer)
POWER OF ATTORNEY
KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that each person whose signature appears below constitutes and appoints Balu Balakrishnan and Sandeep Nayyar his or her true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, with full power of substitution and, for him or her and in his or her name, place and stead, in any and all capacities to sign any and all amendments to this Report on Form 10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorney-in-fact and agent full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully to all intents and purposes as he or she might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that said attorney-in-fact and agent, or his or her substitute or substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.
PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, THIS REPORT HAS BEEN SIGNED BY THE FOLLOWING PERSONS ON BEHALF OF THE REGISTRANT AND IN THE CAPACITIES AND ON THE DATES INDICATED.