Dana Holding Cororation 10-K
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND
EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC
20549
Form 10-K
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF
THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2007
Commission file number 1-1063
Dana Holding
Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as
specified in its charter)
Successor registrant to Dana Corporation
|
|
|
Delaware
|
|
26-1531856
|
(State or other jurisdiction
of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(IRS Employer
Identification No.)
|
|
|
|
4500 Dorr Street, Toledo, Ohio
|
|
43615
|
(Address of principal executive
offices)
|
|
(Zip Code)
|
Registrants telephone number, including area code:
(419)
535-4500
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the
Act:
|
|
|
Title of each class
|
|
Name of each exchange on which registered
|
|
Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share
|
|
New York Stock Exchange
|
Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the
Act:
None
(Title of Class)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known
seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file
reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
Act. Yes o No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding
12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant
was required to file such reports), and (2) has been
subject to such filing requirements for the past
90 days. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers
pursuant to Item 405 of
Regulation S-K
is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best
of registrants knowledge, in definitive proxy or
information statements incorporated by reference in
Part III of this
Form 10-K
or any amendment to this
Form 10-K þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large
accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated
filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of
large accelerated filer, accelerated
filer and smaller reporting company in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer
o
Accelerated filer
þ
Non-accelerated
filer o
Smaller reporting
Company o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company
(as defined in
Rule 12b-2
of the Exchange
Act). Yes o No þ
On June 30, 2007, the last business day of the most
recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market
value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the
predecessor registrant was approximately $315,000,000 based on
the average high and low trading prices of such common stock on
the OTC Bulletin Board.
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed all
documents and reports required to be filed by Section 12,
13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 subsequent to
the distribution of securities under a plan confirmed by a
court. Yes þ No o
On January 31, 2008, the predecessor registrants
common stock, par value $1.00 per share, was cancelled and the
registrant initiated the process of issuing
100,000,000 shares of common stock, par value $0.01 per
share. There were 97,971,791 shares of registrants
common stock outstanding at March 3, 2008.
DANA HOLDING
CORPORATION
FORM 10-K
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007
TABLE OF
CONTENTS
1
PART I
(Dollars in
millions, except per share amounts)
General
Dana Holding Corporation (Dana), a global company incorporated
in Delaware in 2007, is headquartered in Toledo, Ohio. We are a
leading supplier of axle, driveshaft, structural, sealing and
thermal products for global vehicle manufacturers. Our people
design and manufacture products for every major vehicle producer
in the world. We employ approximately 35,000 people in 26
countries and we operate 113 major facilities worldwide.
As a result of Dana Corporations emergence from bankruptcy
under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the
Bankruptcy Code) on January 31, 2008 (the Effective Date),
Dana is the successor registrant to Dana Corporation (Prior
Dana) pursuant to
Rule 12g-3
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The terms Dana, we, our, and
us, when used in this report with respect to the
period prior to Dana Corporations emergence from
bankruptcy, are references to Prior Dana, and when used with
respect to the period commencing after Dana Corporations
emergence, are references to Dana. These references include the
subsidiaries of Prior Dana or Dana, as the case may be, unless
otherwise indicated or the context requires otherwise.
Emergence from
Reorganization Proceedings
Background Prior Dana and forty of its
wholly-owned subsidiaries (collectively, the Debtors) operated
their businesses as
debtors-in-possession
under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code from March 3,
2006 (the Filing Date) until emergence from bankruptcy on
January 31, 2008. The Debtors Chapter 11 cases
(collectively, the Bankruptcy Cases) were consolidated in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New
York (the Bankruptcy Court) under the caption In re Dana
Corporation, et al., Case
No. 06-10354
(BRL). Neither Dana Credit Corporation (DCC) and its
subsidiaries nor any of our
non-U.S. affiliates
were Debtors.
On December 26, 2007, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order
(the Confirmation Order) confirming the Third Amended Joint Plan
of Reorganization of Debtors and
Debtors-in-Possession
(as modified, the Plan) and, on the Effective Date, the Plan was
consummated and we emerged from bankruptcy.
As provided in the Plan and the Confirmation Order, asbestos
personal injury claims were reinstated, and holders of such
claims may continue to assert them. Certain other specific
categories of claims against the Debtors (primarily
workers compensation and inter-company liabilities to
non-Debtors) were retained and are being discharged in the
normal course of business.
Settlement obligations relating to non-pension retiree benefits
for retirees and union employees and long-term disability (LTD)
benefits for union claimants were satisfied with cash payments
of $788 to non-Dana sponsored Voluntary Employee Benefit
Associations (VEBAs) established for the benefit of the retirees
and union employees, including the LTD claimants. Additionally,
we paid DCC $49, the remaining amount due to DCC noteholders,
thereby settling DCCs general unsecured claim of $325
against the Debtors. DCC, in turn, used these funds to repay the
noteholders in full. Administrative claims, priority tax claims
and other classes of allowed claims of $222 were satisfied by
payment of cash at emergence, or will be satisfied with cash
payments as soon thereafter as practical.
Except as specifically provided in the Plan, the distributions
under the Plan were in exchange for, and in complete
satisfaction, discharge and release of, all claims and
third-party ownership interests in the Debtors arising on or
before the Effective Date, including any interest accrued on
such claims from and after the Filing Date.
2
Organization In connection with the
formation of a new holding company, we formed a new legal
organization aligned with how our businesses are managed
operationally. Except as described below, all operating assets
and related undischarged liabilities of Prior Dana were
transferred to new legal entities within the new holding company
structure. Certain other assets and liabilities, including those
associated with asbestos personal injury claims, were retained
in Prior Dana, which was then merged into Dana Companies, LLC, a
consolidated wholly owned subsidiary of Dana. The assets of Dana
Companies, LLC include insurance rights relating to coverage
against these liabilities and other assets sufficient to satisfy
its liabilities. Dana Companies, LLC will continue to process
asbestos personal injury claims in the normal course of business
and will continue to pay such claims in cash. Dana Companies,
LLC will be separately managed, and will have an independent
board member. The independent board member is required to
approve certain transactions including dividends or other
transfers of $1 or more of value to Dana. We expect our
involvement with Dana Companies, LLC will be limited to service
agreements for certain administrative activities. See
Contingencies discussion in Item 7 for a
discussion of our asbestos liabilities.
Common Stock Pursuant to the Plan, all
of the issued and outstanding shares of Prior Dana common stock,
par value $1.00 per share, and any other outstanding equity
securities of Prior Dana, including all options and warrants,
were cancelled. On the Effective Date, we began the process of
issuing 100 million shares of Dana common stock, par value
$0.01 per share, including approximately 70 million shares
for allowed unsecured nonpriority claims, approximately
28 million additional shares deposited to a reserve for
disputed unsecured nonpriority claims in Class 5B under the
Plan, approximately 1 million shares for payment of
post-emergence bonuses to union employees and approximately
1 million shares to pay bonuses to non-union hourly and
salaried non-management employees. The terms and conditions
governing these distributions are set forth in the Plan and
Confirmation Order. The charge to earnings for these bonuses was
recorded as of the Effective Date.
Preferred Stock Pursuant to the Plan, we
issued 2,500,000 shares of 4.0% Series A Preferred
Stock, par value $0.01 per share (the Series A Preferred)
and 5,400,000 shares of 4.0% Series B Preferred Stock,
par value $0.01 per share (the Series B Preferred) on the
Effective Date. The Series A Preferred was sold to
Centerbridge Partners, L.P. and certain of its affiliates
(Centerbridge) for $250, less a commitment fee of $3 and expense
reimbursement of $5, resulting in net proceeds of $242. The
Series B Preferred was sold to certain qualified investors
(as described in the Plan) for $540, less a commitment fee of
$11, resulting in net proceeds of $529.
In accordance with the terms of the preferred stock, all of the
shares of preferred stock are, at the holders option,
convertible into a number of fully paid and non-assessable
shares of new common stock. The price at which each share of
preferred stock will be convertible into common stock is 83% of
its distributable market equity value per share, provided the
ownership percentage held following the hypothetical conversion
of all preferred stock falls within a range defined in the
Restated Certificate of Incorporation. The distributable market
equity value is the per share value of the common stock
determined by calculating the volume-weighted average trading
price of such common stock on the New York Stock Exchange for
the 22 trading days beginning on February 1, 2008 (the
first trading day after the Effective Date) but disregarding the
days with the highest and lowest volume-weighted average sale
prices during such period. The
20-day
volume-weighted average trading price was $11.60.
The range of ownership is a function of our net debt plus the
value of our minority interests as of the Effective Date. If the
amount of our net debt plus the value of our minority interests
as of the Effective Date is $525, then 36.3% would be the upper
end of the range of ownership. Since the conversion of all
preferred stock at 83% of the $11.60 would result in more than
36.3% of our fully diluted common stock being issued to the
holders of preferred stock, the conversion price would be the
price at which the preferred stock is convertible into 36.3% of
our total common stock assuming conversion of all preferred
stock. The upper end of the range is subject to adjustment, as
provided in the Restated Certificate of Incorporation, to the
extent that our net debt plus the value of our minority
interests as of the Effective Date is an amount other than $525.
The initial conversion price is also subject to certain
adjustments as set forth in the Restated Certificate of
Incorporation.
3
Shares of Series A Preferred having an aggregate
liquidation preference of not more than $125 and the
Series B Preferred will be convertible at any time at the
option of the applicable holder on or after July 31, 2008.
The remaining shares of Series A Preferred will be
convertible after January 31, 2011. In addition, in the
event that the common stocks per share closing sale price
exceeds 140% of the conversion price divided by 0.83 for at
least 20 consecutive trading days beginning on or after
January 31, 2013, we will be able to force conversion of
all, but not less than all, of the preferred stock. The price at
which the preferred stock is convertible will be subject to
adjustment in certain customary circumstances, including as a
result of stock splits and combinations, dividends and
distributions and issuances of common stock or common stock
derivatives at a price below the preferred stock conversion
price in effect at that time.
Dividends on the preferred stock are payable in cash at a rate
of 4% per annum on a quarterly basis. If at any time we fail to
pay the equivalent of six quarterly dividends on the preferred
stock, the holders of the preferred stock, voting separately as
a single class, will be entitled to elect two additional
directors to our Board of Directors. However, so long as
Centerbridge owns Series A Preferred having an aggregate
liquidation preference of at least $125, this provision will not
be applicable.
In connection with the issuance of the preferred stock, we
entered into two registration rights agreements: one with
Centerbridge and the other with the purchasers of Series B
Preferred, and we also entered into a shareholders agreement.
Under the terms of these agreements and our Restated Certificate
of Incorporation, Centerbridge was granted representation on our
Board of Directors and certain approval rights related to the
management of our business. See Note 11 to the financial
statements in Item 8 for additional information.
Financing at Emergence On the Effective
Date, Dana, as Borrower, and certain of our domestic
subsidiaries, as guarantors, entered into an exit financing
facility (the Exit Facility) with Citicorp USA, Inc., Lehman
Brothers Inc. and Barclays Capital. The Exit Facility consists
of a Term Facility Credit and Guarantee Agreement in the total
aggregate amount of $1,430 (the Term Facility) and a $650
Revolving Credit and Guaranty Agreement (the Revolving
Facility). The Term Facility was fully drawn in borrowings of
$1,350 on the Effective Date and $80 on February 1, 2008.
There were no borrowings under the Revolving Facility, but $200
was utilized for existing letters of credit. Net proceeds from
the Exit Facility were $1,276 after $114 of original issue
discount and $40 of customary issuance costs and fees. The net
proceeds were used to repay the Senior Secured Superpriority
Debtor-in-Possession
Credit Agreement (DIP Credit Agreement), make other payments
required upon exit from bankruptcy and provide liquidity to fund
working capital and other general corporate purposes. See
Financing Activities in Item 7 and Note 16
to the financial statements in Item 8 for the terms and
conditions of the Exit Facility.
Fresh Start Accounting As required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
(GAAP), we adopted fresh start accounting effective
February 1, 2008 following the guidance of
SOP 90-7.
The financial statements for the periods ended December 31,
2007 and prior do not include the effect of any changes in our
capital structure or changes in the fair value of assets and
liabilities as a result of fresh start accounting. See
Note 23 to the financial statements in Item 8 for an
unaudited pro-forma presentation of the impact of emergence from
reorganization and fresh start accounting on our financial
position at December 31, 2007. The actual impact at
emergence on January 31, 2008 will be reported in our
Form 10-Q
for the first quarter of 2008. For additional explanation of the
impact of reorganization under the Plan and the application of
fresh start accounting see Emergence from Reorganization
Proceedings in Item 7 and Notes 1 and 23 to the
financial statements in Item 8.
Overview of our
Business
Markets
We serve three primary markets:
|
|
|
|
|
Automotive market In the light vehicle
market, we design and manufacture light axles, driveshafts,
structural products, sealing products, thermal products and
related service parts for passenger cars
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
and light trucks including
pick-up
trucks, sport utility vehicles (SUVs), vans and crossover
utility vehicles (CUVs).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial vehicle market In the commercial
vehicle market, we sell, design and manufacture axles,
driveshafts, chassis and suspension modules, ride controls and
related modules and systems, engine sealing products, thermal
products, and related service parts for medium- and heavy-duty
trucks, buses and other commercial vehicles.
|
|
|
|
Off-Highway market In the off-highway market,
we sell, design and manufacture axles, transaxles, driveshafts,
suspension components, transmissions, electronic controls,
related modules and systems, sealing products, thermal products,
and related service parts for construction machinery and
leisure/utility vehicles and outdoor power, agricultural,
mining, forestry and material handling equipment and a variety
of non-vehicular, industrial applications.
|
We have two primary business units: the Automotive Systems Group
(ASG), which sells products mostly into the automotive market,
and the Heavy Vehicle Technologies and Systems Group (HVTSG),
which sells products to the commercial vehicle and off-highway
markets. ASG is organized into individual operating segments
specializing in product lines, while HVTSG is organized to serve
specific markets.
Segments
Senior management and our Board review our operations in seven
operating segments under the two primary business units.
|
|
|
|
|
ASG operates with five segments: Light Axle
Products (Axle), Driveshaft Products (Driveshaft), Sealing
Products (Sealing), Thermal Products (Thermal) and Structural
Products (Structures). ASG reported sales of $5,934 in 2007,
with Ford Motor Company (Ford), General Motors Corp. (GM) and
Toyota Motor Corporation (Toyota) among its largest customers.
At December 31, 2007, ASG employed 27,000 people and
had 86 facilities in 21 countries.
|
|
|
|
HVTSG is comprised of two operating
segments: Commercial Vehicle and Off-Highway,
each of which focuses on specific markets. HVTSG generated sales
of $2,784 in 2007. In 2007, the largest Commercial Vehicle
customers were PACCAR Inc (PACCAR), Navistar International Inc
(Navistar), Daimler AG (Daimler), Ford, MAN Nutzfahrzeuge Group,
GM Truck, Blue Diamond Truck, S de RL de CV, Crane Carrier
Corporation and Oshkosh Corporation. The largest Off-Highway
customers included Deere & Company, AGCO Corporation
and the Manitou Group. At December 31, 2007, HVTSG employed
7,000 people and had 21 facilities in 10 countries.
|
5
The operating segments of our ASG and HVTSG business units
provide the core products shown below.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business Unit
|
|
Segment
|
|
Products
|
|
Market
|
|
ASG
|
|
Axle
|
|
Front and rear axles, differentials, torque couplings, and
modular assemblies
|
|
Light vehicle
|
ASG
|
|
Driveshaft*
|
|
Driveshafts
|
|
Light and commercial vehicle
|
ASG
|
|
Sealing
|
|
Gaskets, cover modules, heat shields, and engine sealing systems
|
|
Light and commercial vehicle and off-highway
|
ASG
|
|
Thermal
|
|
Cooling and heat transfer products
|
|
Light and commercial vehicle and off-highway
|
ASG
|
|
Structures
|
|
Frames, cradles, and side rails
|
|
Light and commercial vehicle
|
HVTSG
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
Axles, driveshafts*, steering shafts, suspensions, tire
management systems
|
|
Commercial vehicle
|
HVTSG
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
Axles, transaxles, driveshafts* and end-fittings, transmissions,
torque converters, and electronic controls
|
|
Off-highway
|
|
|
|
* |
|
The Driveshaft segment of ASG supplies product directly to
original equipment commercial vehicle customers. It also
supplies our Commercial Vehicle and Off-Highway segments with
these components for original equipment off-highway customers
and replacement part customers in both the commercial vehicle
and off-highway markets. |
Divestitures
In October 2005, our Board of Directors approved the divestiture
of three businesses (engine hard parts, fluid products and pump
products). These businesses employed approximately
9,100 people in 44 operations worldwide with annual
revenues exceeding $1,200 in 2006. These businesses are
presented in our financial statements as discontinued operations
through the dates of divestiture.
We have substantially completed these approved divestitures and
have also sold other investments and businesses since 2005. All
of these activities are summarized below.
In January 2007, we sold our trailer axle business manufacturing
assets for $28 in cash and recorded an after-tax gain of $14.
In March 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
We sold our engine hard parts business to MAHLE GmbH (MAHLE) and
received cash proceeds of $98, of which $10 remains escrowed
pending satisfaction of certain indemnification obligations. We
recorded an after-tax loss of $42 in the first quarter of 2007
in connection with this sale and an after-tax loss of $3 in the
second quarter related to a South American operation.
|
|
|
|
We sold our 30% equity interest in GETRAG Getriebe-und
Zahnradfabrik Hermann Hagenmeyer GmbH & Cie KG
(GETRAG) to our joint venture partner, an affiliate of GETRAG,
for $207 in cash. An impairment charge of $58 had been recorded
in the fourth quarter of 2006 to adjust this equity investment
to fair value and an additional charge of $2 after tax was
recorded in the first quarter of 2007 based on the value of the
investment at the time of closing.
|
In July and August 2007, we completed the sale of our fluid
products hose and tubing business to Orhan Holding A.S. and
certain of its affiliates. Aggregate cash proceeds of $84 were
received from these transactions, and an aggregate after-tax
gain of $32 was recorded in the third quarter in connection with
the sale of this business. A final purchase price adjustment is
pending on this sale.
In August 2007, we and certain of our affiliates executed an
axle agreement and related transaction documents providing for a
series of transactions relating to our rights and obligations
under two joint ventures with GETRAG and certain of its
affiliates. These agreements provided for relief from
non-compete provisions
6
in various agreements restricting our ability to participate in
certain markets for axle products other than through
participation in the joint ventures; the grant of a call option
to GETRAG to acquire our ownership interests in the two joint
ventures for a purchase price of $75; our payment to GETRAG of
$11 under certain conditions; the withdrawal, with prejudice, of
bankruptcy claims aggregating approximately $66 filed by GETRAG
and one of the joint venture entities relating to our alleged
breach of certain non-compete provisions; the amendment,
assumption, rejection
and/or
termination of certain other agreements between the parties; and
the grant of certain mutual releases by us and various other
parties. In connection with these agreements, $11 was recorded
as liabilities subject to compromise and as a charge to other
income, net in the second quarter of 2007 based on the
determination that the liability was probable. In October, 2007,
these agreements were approved by the Bankruptcy Court and
became effective. The $11 liability was reclassified to other
current liabilities at December 31, 2007.
In September 2007, we completed the sale of our coupled fluid
products business to Coupled Products Acquisition LLC by having
the buyer assume certain liabilities ($18) of the business at
closing. We recorded an after-tax loss of $23 in the third
quarter in connection with the sale of this business. A final
purchase price adjustment is pending on this sale.
We completed the sale of a portion of the pump products business
in October 2007, generating proceeds of $7 and a nominal
after-tax gain which was recorded in the fourth quarter.
In January 2008, we completed the sale of the remaining assets
of the pump products business to Melling Tool Company,
generating proceeds of $5 and an after-tax loss of $1 that will
be recorded in the first quarter of 2008.
Dana Credit
Corporation
We historically had been a provider of lease financing services
in selected markets through our wholly-owned subsidiary, DCC.
However, in 2001, we determined that the sale of DCCs
businesses would enable us to more sharply focus on our core
businesses. Over the last six years, DCC has sold significant
portions of its asset portfolio and has recorded asset
impairments, reducing its portfolio from $2,200 in December 2001
to $7 at the end of 2007. In September 2006, we adopted a plan
of liquidation providing for the disposition of substantially
all of DCCs assets over an 18- to
24-month
period and, in December 2006, DCC signed a forbearance agreement
with its noteholders which allowed DCC to sell its remaining
asset portfolio and use the proceeds to pay the forbearing
noteholders a pro rata share of the cash generated. On the
Effective Date, and pursuant to the Plan, we paid DCC $49, the
remaining amount due to DCC noteholders, thereby settling
DCCs general unsecured claim of $325 against the Debtors.
Presentation of
Divested Businesses in the Financial Statements
The engine hard parts, fluid products and pump products
businesses have been presented in the financial statements as
discontinued operations. The trailer axle business and DCC did
not meet the requirements for treatment as discontinued
operations, and their results have been included with continuing
operations. Substantially all of these operations have been sold
as of December 31, 2007. See Note 5 to the financial
statements in Item 8 for additional information on
discontinued operations.
7
Geographic
We maintain administrative organizations in four
regions North America, Europe, South America and
Asia Pacific to facilitate financial and statutory
reporting and tax compliance on a worldwide basis and to support
our business units. Our operations are located in the following
countries:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North America
|
|
Europe
|
|
South America
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
Canada
|
|
Austria
|
|
Italy
|
|
Argentina
|
|
Australia
|
Mexico
|
|
Belguim
|
|
Spain
|
|
Brazil
|
|
China
|
United States
|
|
France
|
|
Sweden
|
|
Colombia
|
|
India
|
|
|
Germany
|
|
Switzerland
|
|
South Africa
|
|
Japan
|
|
|
Hungary
|
|
United Kingdom
|
|
Uruguay
|
|
South Korea
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Venezuela
|
|
Taiwan
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thailand
|
Our international subsidiaries and affiliates manufacture and
sell products similar to those we produce in the U.S. Our
operations outside the U.S. may be subject to a greater
risk of changing political, economic and social environments,
changing governmental laws and regulations, currency
revaluations and market fluctuations than our domestic
operations. See the discussion of additional risk factors in
Item 1A.
Non-U.S. sales
comprised $4,721 of our 2007 consolidated sales of $8,721.
Non-U.S. net
income for 2007 was $10 while on a consolidated basis there was
a net loss of $551.
Non-U.S. net
income includes $12 of equity in earnings of international
affiliates. A summary of sales and long-lived assets by region
can be found in Note 22 to the financial statements in
Item 8.
Customer
Dependence
We have thousands of customers around the world and have
developed long-standing business relationships with many of
them. Our ASG segments are largely dependent on light vehicle
Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM) customers, while our
HVTSG segments have a broader and more geographically diverse
customer base, including machinery and equipment manufacturers
in addition to medium- and heavy-duty vehicle OEM customers.
Ford was the only individual customer accounting for 10% or more
of our consolidated sales in 2007. As a percentage of total
sales from continuing operations, our sales to Ford were
approximately 23% in 2007 and 2006 and 26% in 2005, and our
sales to GM were approximately 7% in 2007, 10% in 2006 and 11%
in 2005.
In 2007, Toyota became our third largest customer. As a
percentage of total sales from continuing operations, our sales
to Toyota were 6% in 2007, 5% in 2006 and 4% in 2005. In 2006,
PACCAR and Navistar were our third and fourth largest customers.
PACCAR, Navistar, Chrysler LLC (Chrysler), Daimler and Nissan
Motor Company Ltd. (Nissan), collectively accounted for
approximately 19% of our revenues in 2007, 23% in 2006 and 21%
in 2005.
Loss of all or a substantial portion of our sales to Ford, GM,
Toyota or other large volume customers would have a significant
adverse effect on our financial results until such lost sales
volume could be replaced and there is no assurance that any such
lost volume would be replaced. We continue to work to diversify
our customer base and geographic footprint.
8
Products
The mix of sales by product for the last three years is as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of
|
|
|
|
Consolidated Sales
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Axle
|
|
|
30.1
|
%
|
|
|
25.9
|
%
|
|
|
28.0
|
%
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
13.6
|
|
|
|
13.1
|
|
Sealing
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
7.7
|
|
Thermal
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
Structures
|
|
|
12.3
|
|
|
|
13.8
|
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
Other
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.9
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total ASG
|
|
|
68.1
|
|
|
|
65.5
|
|
|
|
69.0
|
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Axle
|
|
|
22.7
|
|
|
|
23.4
|
|
|
|
23.5
|
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
Other
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
8.6
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total HVTSG
|
|
|
31.9
|
|
|
|
34.2
|
|
|
|
30.7
|
|
Other Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
See Note 22, Segment, Geographical Areas and Major
Customer Information, in Item 8 for additional
segment information including revenues from external customers,
segment profitability, capital spending, depreciation and
amortization and total assets.
Sources and
Availability of Raw Materials
We use a variety of raw materials in the production of our
products, including steel and products containing steel,
stainless steel, forgings, castings and bearings. Other
commodity purchases include aluminum, brass, copper and
plastics. Prior to 2005, operating units purchased most of the
raw materials they required from suppliers located within their
local geographic regions. The process was changed by combining
and centralizing our purchases to give us greater leverage with
our suppliers in order to manage and reduce our production
costs. These materials are usually available from multiple
qualified sources in quantities sufficient for our needs.
However, some of our operations remain dependent on single
sources for certain raw materials.
While our suppliers have generally been able to support our
needs, our operations may experience shortages and delays in the
supply of raw material from time to time, due to strong demand,
capacity limitations and other problems experienced by the
suppliers. A significant or prolonged shortage of critical
components from any of our suppliers could adversely impact our
ability to meet our production schedules and to deliver our
products to our customers in a timely manner.
High steel and other raw material costs, primarily resulting
from limited capacity and high demand, had a major adverse
effect on our results of operations in recent years, as
discussed in Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations in
Item 7.
Our bankruptcy created supplier concerns over non-payment for
pre-petition goods and services and other uncertainties. To
date, this has not had a significant effect on our ability to
negotiate new contracts and terms with our suppliers on an
ongoing basis.
9
Seasonality
Our businesses are generally not seasonal. However, our sales
are closely related to the production schedules of our OEM
customers and, historically, those schedules have been weakest
in the third quarter of the year due to a large number of model
year change-overs that occur during this period. Additionally,
third-quarter production schedules in Europe are typically
impacted by the summer holiday schedules and fourth quarter
production by year end holidays.
Backlog
Our products are not sold on a backlog basis since most orders
may be rescheduled or modified by our customers at any time. Our
product sales are dependent upon the number of vehicles that our
customers actually produce as well as the timing of such
production. A substantial amount of the new business we are
awarded by OEMs is granted well in advance of a program launch.
These awards typically extend through the life of the given
program. We estimate future revenues from new business on the
projected volume under these programs. See New
Business in Item 7 for additional explanations
related to new business awarded.
Competition
Within each of our markets, we compete with a variety of
independent suppliers and distributors, as well as with the
in-house operations of certain OEMs. We compete primarily on the
basis of price, product quality, technology, delivery and
service.
Automotive
Systems Group
The Automotive Systems Group consists of five product groups:
Axle; Driveshaft; Structural; Thermal and Sealing Products. It
is one of the leading independent suppliers serving the light
vehicle and other related markets around the world.
In the Axle and Driveshaft segments, our principal competitors
include ZF Friedrichshafen AG, GKN plc (GKN Driveline), American
Axle & Manufacturing (American Axle), Magna
International Inc. (Magna) and the in-house operations of
Chrysler and Ford. The sector is also attracting new competitors
from Asia who are entering both of these product lines through
acquisition of OEM non-core operations. For example, Wanxiang of
China has recently acquired Visteon Corporations (Visteon)
driveshaft manufacturing facilities in the USA.
The Structures segment produces vehicle frames and cradles and
its primary competitors are Magna, Press Kogyo Co., Ltd.,
Metalsa S. de R. L., Tower Automotive Inc. and Martinrea
International Inc.
In Sealing, we are also one of the worlds leading
independent suppliers with a product portfolio including
gaskets, seals, cover modules and thermal/acoustic shields. Our
primary global competitors in this segment are ElringKlinger AG,
Federal-Mogul Corporation and Freudenberg NOK Group.
The Thermal Products Group produces heat exchangers, valves and
small radiators for a wide variety of vehicle cooling
applications. Competitors in the Thermal segment include Behr
GmbH & Co. KG, Stuttgart, Modine Manufacturing
Company, Valeo Group and Denso Corporation.
Heavy Vehicle
Technologies and Systems Group
We are one of the primary independent suppliers of axles,
driveshafts and other products for both the medium- and
heavy-truck markets, as well as various specialty and
off-highway segments, and we also specialize in the manufacture
of off-highway transmissions.
Our primary competitors in North America are ArvinMeritor, Inc.
(ArvinMeritor) and American Axle in the medium- and heavy-truck
markets. Major competitors in Europe in both the heavy-truck and
off-highway markets include Carraro S.p.A. (Carraro), ZF Group,
Klein Products Inc. (Klein) and certain OEMs vertically
integrated operations.
10
Patents and
Trademarks
Our proprietary axle, driveshaft, structural, sealing and
thermal product lines have strong identities in the markets we
serve. Throughout these product lines, we manufacture and sell
our products under a number of patents that have been obtained
over a period of years and expire at various times. We consider
each of these patents to be of value and aggressively protect
our rights throughout the world against infringement. We are
involved with many product lines, and the loss or expiration of
any particular patent would not materially affect our sales and
profits.
We own or have licensed numerous trademarks that are registered
in many countries, enabling us to market our products worldwide.
For example, our
Spicer®,
Victor
Reinz®,
Parish®
and
Long®
trademarks are widely recognized in their market segments.
Research and
Development
From our introduction of the automotive universal joint in 1904,
we have been focused on technological innovation. Our objective
is to be an essential partner to our customers and remain highly
focused on offering superior product quality, technologically
advanced products, world-class service and competitive prices.
To enhance quality and reduce costs, we use statistical process
control, cellular manufacturing, flexible regional production
and assembly, global sourcing and extensive employee training.
We engage in ongoing engineering, research and development
activities to improve the reliability, performance and
cost-effectiveness of our existing products and to design and
develop innovative products that meet customer requirements for
new applications. We are integrating related operations to
create a more innovative environment, speed product development,
maximize efficiency and improve communication and information
sharing among our research and development operations. At
December 31, 2007, ASG had five major technical centers and
HVTSG had one. Our engineering, research and development and
quality control costs were $189 in 2007, $221 in 2006 and $275
in 2005.
We are developing a number of products that will assist fuel
cell manufacturers for vehicular and other
applications to make this technology commercially
viable in mass production. Specifically, we are applying the
expertise from our Sealing segment to develop metallic and
composite bipolar plates used in the fuel cell stack.
Furthermore, our Thermal segment is applying its heat transfer
technology to provide thermal management sub-systems used in the
overall fuel cell process.
Employment
Our worldwide employment was approximately 35,000 at
December 31, 2007.
Environmental
Compliance
We make capital expenditures in the normal course of business as
necessary to ensure that our facilities are in compliance with
applicable environmental laws and regulations. The cost of
environmental compliance has not been, except for settlement of
certain environmental matters as part of the bankruptcy
proceedings, a material part of capital expenditures and did not
have a materially adverse effect on earnings or competitive
position in 2007.
In connection with our bankruptcy reorganization we settled
certain pre-petition claims related to environmental matters.
See Contingencies in Item 7 and the discussion
of our emergence in Note 1 to the financial statements in
Item 8.
Executive
Officers of the Registrant
We have eight executive officers as of March 3, 2008:
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Devine, age 63, has been Executive Chairman of our
Board since January 2008 and Acting Chief Executive Officer
(CEO) since February 2008. Mr. Devine retired from GM in
2006. He was Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer of GM
during the period from 2001 to 2006. Prior to joining GM,
|
11
|
|
|
|
|
Mr. Devine served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
of Fluid Ventures, LLC. Fluid Ventures, LLC was an internet
start-up
investment company. Previously, he spent 32 years at Ford,
where he last served as Executive Vice President and Chief
Financial Officer. Mr. Devine is also a board member of
Amerigon Incorporated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Richard J. Dyer, age 52, has been a Vice President since
December 2005 and Chief Accounting Officer since March 2005. He
was Director Corporate Accounting from 2002 to 2005 and Manager,
Corporate Accounting from 1997 to 2002.
|
|
|
|
Ralf Goettel, age 41, has served as President of Sealing
Products, Dana Europe, and Thermal Products since November 2007.
Mr. Goettel was President of Engine Products and Dana
Europe from 2005 to 2007 when he assumed the added
responsibility of President of Thermal Products.
Mr. Goettel joined us in 1993 as an application engineer in
the Sealing Products Group.
|
|
|
|
Kenneth A. Hiltz, age 55, has been our Chief Financial
Officer (CFO) since March 2006. He previously served as CFO at
Foster Wheeler Ltd., a global provider of engineering services
and products, from 2003 to 2004 and as Chief Restructuring
Officer and CFO of Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc., a global
supplier of automotive and commercial wheels, brakes,
powertrain, suspension, structural and other lightweight
components, from 2001 to 2003. Mr. Hiltz has been a
Managing Director of Alix Partners LLP, a financial advisory
firm specializing in performance improvement and corporate
turnarounds, since 1993.
|
|
|
|
Robert H. Marcin, age 62, has been our Chief Administrative
Officer since February 2008. Mr. Marcin retired from
Visteon, a supplier of automotive systems, modules and
components, in 2007. He was Senior Vice President, Leadership
Assessment of Visteon from 2005 to 2007. Prior to that, he
served as Senior Vice President, Corporate Relations from 2003
to 2005, and was Senior Vice President of Human Resources of
Visteon from its formation in January 2000 until 2003.
|
|
|
|
Paul E. Miller, age 56, has been our Vice
President Purchasing since May 2004. He was formerly
employed by Delphi Corporation, a global supplier of vehicle
electronics, transportation components, integrated systems and
modules and other electronic technology, where he was part of
Delphi Packard Electric Systems as Business Line Executive,
Electrical/Electronic Distribution Systems from 2002 to 2004,
and of Delphi Delco Electronics Systems as General
Director Sales, Marketing and Service from 2001 to
2002.
|
|
|
|
Nick L. Stanage, age 49, has been our President
Heavy Vehicle Products since December 2005. He joined us in
August 2005 as Vice President and General Manager of our
Commercial Vehicle Group. He was formerly employed by Honeywell
International (a diversified technology and manufacturing
leader, serving customers worldwide with aerospace products and
services; control technologies for buildings, homes and
industry; automotive products; turbochargers; and specialty
materials), where he served as Vice President and General
Manager of the Engine Systems & Accessories Division
during 2005, and in the Customer Products Group as Vice
President, Integrated Supply Chain & Technology from
2003 to 2005 and Vice President, Operations from 2001 to 2003.
|
|
|
|
Thomas R. Stone, age 55, has been our President, Light Axle
Products Group, Automotive Systems Group since June 2005.
Mr. Stone came to Dana from GKN plc (GKN) in June 2005 to
serve as President of Traction Products. He joined GKN in 1997
as Vice President Operations, GKN Automotive and
subsequently served as Managing Director GKN
Driveline Americas from January 2003 until June 2005.
|
Our executive officers were appointed to their positions by the
Board of Directors of Dana (the Board) and serve at the
Boards pleasure.
Available
Information
Our Annual reports on
Form 10-K,
quarterly reports on
Form 10-Q,
current reports on
Form 8-K
and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
12
Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) are available, free of charge, on or
through our Internet website
(http://www.dana.com/investors)
as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file
such materials with, or furnish them to, the Securities and
Exchange Commission (SEC). We also post our Corporate
Governance Guidelines, Standards of Business Code for Members of
the Board of Directors, Board Committee membership lists and
charters, Standards of Business Conduct and other
corporate governance materials at this website address. Copies
of these posted materials are available in print, free of
charge, to any stockholder upon request from: Investor Relations
Department, P.O. Box 1000, Toledo, Ohio 43697 or via
telephone at
419-535-4635
or e-mail at
InvestorRelations@dana.com. The inclusion of our website address
in this report is an inactive textual reference only, and is not
intended to include or incorporate by reference the information
on our website into this report.
Forward-looking
information
Statements in this report that are not entirely historical
constitute forward-looking statements within the
meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.
Such forwarding-looking statements are indicated by words such
as anticipates, expects,
believes, intends, plans,
estimates, projects and similar
expressions. These statements represent the present expectations
of Dana and its consolidated subsidiaries based on current
information and assumptions. Forward-looking statements are
inherently subject to risks and uncertainties. Our plans,
actions and actual results could differ materially from our
present expectations due to a number of factors, including those
discussed below and elsewhere in this report (our 2007
Form 10-K)
and in other filings with the SEC.
We are impacted by events and conditions that affect the light
vehicle, commercial vehicle and off-highway industries that we
serve, as well as by factors specific to Dana. Among the risks
that could materially adversely affect our business, financial
condition or results of operations are the following, many of
which are interrelated.
Company-Specific
Risk Factors
Our Exit Facility
contains covenants that may constrain our growth.
The financial covenants in our Exit Facility may hinder our
ability to finance future operations, make potential
acquisitions or investments, meet capital needs or engage in
business activities that may be in our best interest such as
future transactions involving our securities. These restrictions
could hinder us from responding to changing business and
economic conditions and from implementing our business plan.
We may be unable
to comply with the financial covenants in our Exit
Facility.
The financial covenants in our Exit Facility require us to
achieve certain financial ratios based on levels of earnings
before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and certain
levels of restructuring and reorganization related costs
(EBITDA), as defined in the Exit Facility. A failure to comply
with these or other covenants in the Exit Facility could, if we
were unable to obtain a waiver or an amendment of the covenant
terms, cause an event of default that would cause our loans
under the Exit Facility to become immediately due and payable.
In addition, a waiver or an amendment could substantially
increase the cost of borrowing.
We operate as a
holding company and depend on our subsidiaries for cash to
satisfy the obligations of the holding company.
Dana Holding Corporation is a holding company. Our subsidiaries
conduct all of our operations and own substantially all of our
assets. Our cash flow and our ability to meet our obligations
depends on the cash flow of our subsidiaries. In addition, the
payments of funds in the form of dividends, intercompany
payments, tax sharing payments and other forms may be subject to
restrictions under the laws of the countries of incorporation of
our subsidiaries.
13
We could be
adversely impacted by the loss of any of our significant
customers, changes in their requirements for our products or
changes in their financial condition.
We are reliant upon sales to a few significant customers. Sales
to Ford and GM were 30% of our overall revenue in 2007, while
sales to Toyota, PACCAR, Navistar, Chrysler, Daimler and Nissan
in the aggregate accounted for another 25%. Changes in our
business relationships with any of our large customers or in the
timing, size and continuation of their various programs could
have an adverse impact on us. The loss of any of these
customers, the loss of business with respect to one or more of
their vehicle models on which we have a high component content,
or a further significant decline in the production levels of
such vehicles would negatively impact our business, results of
operations and financial condition. We are continually bidding
on new business with these customers, as well as seeking to
diversify our customer base, but there is no assurance that our
efforts will be successful. Further, to the extent that the
financial condition of our largest customers deteriorates,
including a possible bankruptcy, or their sales otherwise
decline, our financial position and results of operations could
be adversely affected.
Labor stoppages
or work slowdowns at key suppliers of our customers could result
in a disruption in our operations and have a material adverse
effect on our business.
Our customers rely on other suppliers to provide them with the
parts they need to manufacture vehicles. Many of these
suppliers workforces are represented by labor unions.
Workforce disputes that result in work stoppages or slowdowns at
these suppliers could disrupt the operations of our customers
which could have a material adverse effect on demand for the
products we supply our customers.
We could be
adversely affected if we are unable to recover portions of our
high commodity costs (including costs of steel, other raw
materials and energy) from our customers.
For some time, high commodity costs have significantly impacted
our earnings. As part of our reorganization initiatives, we have
been working with our customers to recover a greater portion of
our commodity costs. While we have achieved some success in
these efforts to date, there is no assurance that commodity
costs will not continue to adversely impact our profitability in
the future.
We could be
adversely affected if we experience shortages of components from
our suppliers.
We spend over $4,000 annually for purchased goods and services.
To manage and reduce these costs, we have been consolidating our
supply base. As a result, we are dependent on single sources of
supply for some components of our products. We select our
suppliers based on total value (including price, delivery and
quality), taking into consideration their production capacities
and financial condition, and we expect that they will be able to
support our needs. However, there is no assurance that strong
demand, capacity limitations or other problems experienced by
our suppliers will not result in occasional shortages or delays
in their supply of components to us. If we were to experience a
significant or prolonged shortage of critical components from
any of our suppliers, particularly those who are sole sources,
and were unable to procure the components from other sources, we
would be unable to meet our production schedules for some of our
key products and to ship such products to our customers in
timely fashion, which would adversely affect our revenues,
margins and customer relations.
We could be
adversely impacted by the costs of environmental, health, safety
and product liability compliance.
Our operations are subject to environmental laws and regulations
in the U.S. and other countries that govern emissions to
the air; discharges to water; the generation, handling, storage,
transportation, treatment and disposal of waste materials and
the cleanup of contaminated properties. Historically,
environmental costs with respect to our former and existing
operations have not been material. However, there is no
assurance that the costs of complying with current environmental
laws and regulations, or those that may be adopted in the future
will not increase and adversely impact us.
14
There is also no assurance that the costs of complying with
various laws and regulations, or those that may be adopted in
the future, that relate to health, safety and product liability
concerns will not adversely impact us.
Our ability to
utilize net operating loss carryforwards (NOLs) will be
limited.
The discharge of a debt obligation by a taxpayer for an amount
less than the recorded value generally creates cancellation of
indebtedness (COD) income, which must be included in the
taxpayers taxable income. In our case the discharge of the
debt was granted by the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to a plan of
reorganization approved by the court, and we will not be
required to recognize COD income as taxable income. However,
certain tax attributes otherwise available and of value to a
debtor are reduced by the amount of COD income. We have not
completed our analysis regarding the impact of COD income on our
tax attributes.
Based on our preliminary analysis, we believe that our
consolidated NOLs as of the Effective Date were eliminated and
other attributes were significantly reduced, including the tax
basis of assets, but 2008 post emergence payments will generate
tax deductions exceeding $700.
Risk Factors in
the Markets We Serve
We may be
adversely impacted by changes in national and international
economic, legislative and political conditions.
Our sales depend, in large part, on economic conditions in the
global light vehicle, commercial vehicle and off-highway OEM
markets that we serve. Demand in these markets fluctuates in
response to overall economic conditions, including changes in
general economic indicators, interest rate levels and, in our
vehicular markets, fuel costs. For example, higher gasoline
prices in 2007 contributed to weaker demand in North America for
certain vehicles for which we supply products, especially
full-size SUVs and
pick-up
trucks. If gasoline prices remain high or continue to rise, the
demand for such vehicles could weaken further and the recent
shift in consumer interest to passenger cars and CUVs, in
preference to SUVs and
pick-up
trucks, could be accelerated. This would have an adverse effect
on our business, as our product content on CUVs is less
significant than our content on
pick-up
trucks and SUVs. In particular, our structures business that
supplies the body-on-frame components for full-size SUVs does
not have significant content on CUVs.
We operate in 26 countries around the world and we depend on
significant foreign suppliers and vendors. Legislative and
political activities within the countries where we conduct
business, particularly in emerging and less developed
international countries, could adversely impact our ability to
operate in those countries. The political situation in some
countries creates a risk of the seizure of our assets. In
addition, the political environment could create instability in
our contractual relationships with no effective legal safeguards
for resolution of these issues.
We may be
adversely impacted by the strength of other currencies, relative
to the U.S. dollar, in the overseas countries in which we do
business.
Approximately 54% of our sales were from our operations located
in countries other than the United States. Currency variations
can have an impact on our results (expressed in
U.S. dollars). Currency variations can also adversely
affect margins on sales of our products in countries outside of
the United States and margins on sales of products that include
components obtained from affiliate or other suppliers located
outside of the United States. We use a combination of natural
hedging techniques and financial derivatives to protect against
foreign currency exchange rate risks. Such hedging activities
may be ineffective or may not offset more than a portion of the
adverse financial impact resulting from currency variations.
Gains or losses associated with hedging activities also may
impact operating results.
15
We may be
adversely impacted by new laws, regulations or policies of
governmental organizations related to increased fuel economy
standards and reduced greenhouse gas emissions, or changes in
existing ones.
It is anticipated that the number and extent of governmental
regulations related to fuel economy standards and greenhouse gas
emissions, and the costs to comply with them, will increase
significantly in the future. Recently, the United States enacted
the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, a new energy
bill that will require significant increases in the Corporate
Average Fuel Economy requirements applicable to cars and light
trucks beginning with the 2011 model year. In addition, a
growing number of states are adopting regulations that establish
carbon dioxide emission standards that effectively impose
similarly increased fuel economy standards for new vehicles sold
in those states. Compliance costs for our customers could
require them to alter their spending, research and development
plans, curtail sales, cease production or exit certain market
segments characterized by lower fuel efficiency. Any of these
actions could adversely affect our financial position and
results of operations.
Negative economic
outlooks in the United States and elsewhere could have a
material adverse effect on our business.
Our business is tied to general economic and industry
conditions. Demand for vehicles depends largely on general
economic conditions, including the strength of the economy,
unemployment levels, consumer confidence levels, the
availability and cost of credit and the cost of fuel. The
decline in housing construction further reduced demand for
vehicles, particularly
pick-up
trucks and SUVs on which we provide significant content. Leading
economic indicators such as employment levels and income growth
predict a downward trend in the United States economy. The
overall market for new vehicle sales in the United States is
expected to decline in 2008, possibly significantly. Our
customers could reduce their vehicle production in North America
and, as a result, demand for our products would be adversely
affected.
Risk Factors
Related to our Securities
There is limited
history of trading of our common stock, and volatility is
possible.
Our post-emergence common stock has traded for only a limited
period. Some of the holders who received common stock upon
emergence may not elect to hold their shares on a long-term
basis. Sales by these stockholders of a substantial number of
shares could significantly reduce the market price of our common
stock. Moreover, the perception that these stockholders might
sell significant amounts of our common stock could depress the
trading price of the stock for a considerable period. Such sales
of common stock, and the possibility thereof, could make it more
difficult for us to sell equity, or equity-related securities,
in the future at a time and price that we consider appropriate.
Our adoption of
fresh start accounting could result in additional asset
impairments and may make comparisons of our financial position
and results of operations to prior periods more
difficult.
Our adoption of fresh start accounting upon emergence will
increase the value of our long lived assets. This increased
valuation could result in additional impairments in future
periods.
As required by GAAP, Dana adopted fresh start accounting
effective February 1, 2008. Fresh start accounting requires
us to adjust all of our assets and liabilities to their
respective fair values. As a result, the consolidated financial
statements for periods after the emergence will not be
comparable to those of the periods prior to the emergence which
are presented on an historical basis. Fresh start accounting may
make it more difficult to compare our post-emergence financial
position and results of operations to those in the pre-emergence
periods which could limit investment in our stock.
16
One of our
stockholders has limited approval rights with respect to our
business and may have conflicts of interest with us in the
future.
In accordance with the Plan, Centerbridge owns preferred stock
and is entitled to vote on most matters presented to
stockholders on an as-converted basis. Centerbridge also has
certain approval rights, board representation and other rights
pursuant to our Restated Certificate of Incorporation, and a
shareholders agreement. These rights include the right to
approve a transaction involving a change of control of our
company, subject to being overridden by a two-thirds stockholder
vote. (See Note 11 to the financial statements in
Item 8 for additional information regarding
Centerbridges participation in the selection of our Board
of Directors and approval rights with respect to certain
transactions.)
Conflicts of interest may arise in the future between us and
Centerbridge. For example, Centerbridge and its affiliated
investors are in the business of making investments in companies
and may acquire and hold interests in businesses that compete
directly or indirectly with us.
|
|
Item 1B.
|
Unresolved
Staff Comments
|
-None-
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
North
|
|
|
|
|
|
South
|
|
|
Asia/
|
|
|
|
|
Type of Facility
|
|
America
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
America
|
|
|
Pacific
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
Administrative Offices
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
Engineering Multiple Groups
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Axle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
27
|
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
Sealing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
Engineering
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
Thermal
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
Structures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
Engineering
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
Engineering
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Manufacturing/Distribution
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Dana
|
|
|
63
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2007, we operated in 26 countries and had
113 major manufacturing/ distribution, engineering or office
facilities worldwide. While we lease 39 of the manufacturing and
distribution operations, we own the remainder of our facilities.
We believe that all of our property and equipment is properly
maintained. Historically, there was significant excess capacity
in our facilities based on our manufacturing and distribution
needs, especially in the United States. As part of our
reorganization initiatives, we took significant steps to close
facilities as discussed in Item 7, under Business
Strategy.
17
Our corporate headquarters facilities are located in Toledo,
Ohio and include three office facilities housing functions that
have global responsibility for finance and accounting, treasury,
risk management, legal, human resources, procurement and supply
chain management, communications and information technology. Our
obligations under the Exit Facility are secured by, among other
things, mortgages on all of our domestic facilities that we own.
|
|
Item 3.
|
Legal
Proceedings
|
As discussed in Item 1. Business
Emergence from Reorganization Proceedings,
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Results of Operations Emergence Proceedings
and in Notes 1 and 23 to the financials statements in
Item 8, we emerged from bankruptcy on January 31,
2008. Pursuant to the Plan, the pre-petition ownership interests
in Prior Dana were cancelled and all of the pre-petition claims
against the Debtors, including claims with respect to debt,
pension and postretirement medical obligations and other
liabilities, were addressed in connection with our emergence
from bankruptcy.
On January 3, 2008, an Ad Hoc Committee of Asbestos
Personal Injury Claimants filed a notice of appeal of the
Confirmation Order (District Court Case
No. 08-CV-01037).
On January 4, 2008, an asbestos claimant, Jose Angel
Valdez, filed a notice of appeal of the Confirmation Order
(District Court Case
No. 08-CV-01038).
On February 5, 2008, Prior Dana and the other
post-emergence Debtors (collectively, the Reorganized
Debtors) filed a motion seeking to consolidate the two
appeals. Briefing is ongoing in these appeals, and the
Reorganized Debtors are moving to have the appeals dismissed.
As previously reported and as discussed in Item 7 and in
Note 18 to the financial statements in Item 8, we are
a party to a pending stockholder derivative action, as well as
various pending judicial and administrative proceedings that
arose in the ordinary course of business (including both
pre-petition and subsequent proceedings), and we are cooperating
with a formal investigation by the SEC with respect to matters
related to the restatement of financial statements for the first
two quarters of 2005 and fiscal years 2002 through 2004. After
reviewing the currently pending lawsuits and proceedings
(including the probable outcomes, reasonably anticipated costs
and expenses, availability and limits of our insurance coverage
and surety bonds and our established reserves for uninsured
liabilities), we do not believe that any liabilities that may
result are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect
on our liquidity, financial condition or results of operations.
|
|
Item 4.
|
Submission
of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
|
We did not submit any matters for a stockholder vote in the
fourth quarter of 2007.
18
PART II
|
|
Item 5.
|
Market
For Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters
and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
|
Market
Information
Shares of common stock of Prior Dana issued and outstanding
traded on the OTC Bulletin Board under the symbol
DCNAQ beginning on March 3, 2006 and continued
until the Effective Date. On the Effective Date, all of the
outstanding common stock and all other outstanding equity
securities of Prior Dana, including all options and warrants,
were cancelled pursuant to the terms of the Plan.
On the Effective Date, we began the process of issuing
100 million shares of Dana common stock, par value $0.01
per share, including approximately 70 million shares for
allowed unsecured nonpriority claims, approximately
28 million additional shares deposited to a reserve for
disputed unsecured nonpriority claims in Class 5B under the
Plan, approximately 1 million shares for payment of
post-emergence bonuses to union employees and approximately
1 million shares to pay bonuses to non-union hourly and
salaried non-management employees. The charge to earnings for
these bonuses was recorded as of the Effective Date.
Pursuant to the Plan, we will be distributing approximately
500,000 shares of our common stock on or before April 1,
2008 for the bonuses to certain union and non-union employees as
discussed above. We will also distribute approximately
1 million shares of the 70 million shares discussed
above to satisfy claims of certain current and former employees.
All of these shares will be freely tradable upon issuance. While
it is not possible to predict the total volume of resales that
may occur, some or all of the recipients will likely direct
their independent agent to promptly sell a percentage of these
shares (estimated to be a maximum of 40% of the shares) on
behalf of the recipient in order to satisfy withholding
obligations with respect to these distributions.
Our common stock trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the
symbol DAN.
The following table shows the quarterly ranges of the price per
share of Prior Dana common stock during 2006 and 2007. No
dividends were declared or paid in 2006 and 2007. The value of
one share of Prior Dana common stock bears no relation to the
value of one share of our newly-issued common stock.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarterly
|
|
High and Low Prices per Share of Prior Dana Common Stock
|
|
High Price
|
|
|
Low Price
|
|
|
As reported by the New York Stock Exchange:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter 2006 (through March 2, 2006)
|
|
$
|
8.05
|
|
|
$
|
1.02
|
|
Bid Prices per OTC Bulletin Board Quotations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First Quarter 2006 (beginning March 3, 2006)
|
|
$
|
2.03
|
|
|
$
|
0.65
|
|
Second Quarter 2006
|
|
|
3.52
|
|
|
|
1.27
|
|
Third Quarter 2006
|
|
|
2.83
|
|
|
|
0.84
|
|
Fourth Quarter 2006
|
|
|
2.02
|
|
|
|
1.05
|
|
First Quarter 2007
|
|
|
1.47
|
|
|
|
0.72
|
|
Second Quarter 2007
|
|
|
2.51
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
Third Quarter 2007
|
|
|
2.18
|
|
|
|
0.18
|
|
Fourth Quarter 2007
|
|
|
0.39
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
|
Holders of Common
Stock
The number of stockholders of record of our common stock on
March 3, 2008 was approximately 1,678.
Dividends
We did not pay any dividends during the two most recent fiscal
years. The terms of our Exit Facility restrict the payment of
dividends on shares of common stock, and we do not anticipate
paying any such dividends at this time. We anticipate that our
earnings will be retained to finance our operations and reduce
debt.
19
Issuers Purchases
of Equity Securities
No purchases of equity securities were made during the quarter
ended December 31, 2007.
Annual
Meeting
We do not intend to hold an annual meeting in 2008.
|
|
Item 6.
|
Selected
Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
8,721
|
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
8,611
|
|
|
$
|
7,775
|
|
|
$
|
6,714
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
$
|
(387
|
)
|
|
$
|
(571
|
)
|
|
$
|
(285
|
)
|
|
$
|
(165
|
)
|
|
$
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(433
|
)
|
|
$
|
(618
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,175
|
)
|
|
$
|
72
|
|
|
$
|
155
|
|
Income (loss) from discontinued operations*
|
|
|
(118
|
)
|
|
|
(121
|
)
|
|
|
(434
|
)
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
73
|
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(551
|
)
|
|
$
|
(739
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
$
|
62
|
|
|
$
|
228
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per common share basic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(2.89
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.11
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.86
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
1.05
|
|
Discontinued operations*
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
|
|
(0.81
|
)
|
|
|
(2.90
|
)
|
|
|
(0.07
|
)
|
|
|
0.49
|
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(3.68
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.92
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.73
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.41
|
|
|
$
|
1.54
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings (loss) per common share diluted
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(2.89
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.11
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.86
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
1.04
|
|
Discontinued operations*
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
|
|
(0.81
|
)
|
|
|
(2.90
|
)
|
|
|
(0.07
|
)
|
|
|
0.49
|
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss)
|
|
$
|
(3.68
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.92
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.73
|
)
|
|
$
|
0.41
|
|
|
$
|
1.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends per common share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
$
|
0.48
|
|
|
$
|
0.09
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average number of shares outstanding (in millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
|
148
|
|
Diluted
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
|
|
149
|
|
Stock price
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High
|
|
$
|
2.51
|
|
|
$
|
8.05
|
|
|
$
|
17.56
|
|
|
$
|
23.20
|
|
|
$
|
18.40
|
|
Low
|
|
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
0.65
|
|
|
|
5.50
|
|
|
|
13.86
|
|
|
|
6.15
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31,
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2004
|
|
|
2003
|
|
|
Summary of Financial Position
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
6,425
|
|
|
$
|
6,664
|
|
|
$
|
7,358
|
|
|
$
|
9,019
|
|
|
$
|
9,485
|
|
Short-term debt
|
|
|
1,183
|
|
|
|
293
|
|
|
|
2,578
|
|
|
|
155
|
|
|
|
493
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
722
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
2,054
|
|
|
|
2,605
|
|
Total stockholders equity (deficit)
|
|
|
(782
|
)
|
|
|
(834
|
)
|
|
|
545
|
|
|
|
2,411
|
|
|
|
2,050
|
|
Book value per share
|
|
|
(5.22
|
)
|
|
|
(5.55
|
)
|
|
|
3.63
|
|
|
|
16.19
|
|
|
|
13.85
|
|
20
|
|
|
* |
|
The provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards
(SFAS) No. 144 are generally prospective from the date of
adoption and therefore do not apply to divestitures announced
prior to January 1, 2002. Accordingly, the disposals of
selected subsidiaries of DCC that were announced in October 2001
and completed at various times thereafter were not considered in
our determination of discontinued operations. |
We adopted FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation of FASB Statement
No. 109 (FIN 48) on January 1, 2007
and increased our 2007 beginning retained earnings by
approximately $3. We adopted SFAS No.s 123(R) and 158
in 2006. SFAS 123(R), Share-Based Payments
requires that we measure compensation cost arising from the
grant of share-based awards to employees at fair value and
recognize such costs in income over the period during which the
service is provided. The adoption of SFAS No. 158,
Employers Accounting for Defined-Benefit Pension and
Other Postretirement Plans, resulted in a decrease in
total stockholders equity of $818 as of December 31,
2006. For further information regarding the impact of the
adoption of SFAS No. 158, see Note 14 to the
financial statements in Item 8. We previously reported a
change in accounting for warranty expense in 2005 and also
adopted new accounting guidance related to recognition of asset
retirement obligations. See Note 2 to the financial
statements in Item 8 for additional information related to
these changes in accounting.
|
|
Item 7.
|
Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations (Dollars in millions)
|
Managements discussion and analysis of financial condition
and results of operations should be read in conjunction with the
financial statements and accompanying notes in Item 8 of
this report.
Management
Overview
We are a leading supplier of axle, driveshaft, structures,
sealing and thermal products, and we design and manufacture
products for every major vehicle producer in the world. We are
focused on being an essential partner to automotive, commercial
truck and off-highway vehicle customers. We employ approximately
35,000 people in 26 countries. Our world headquarters are
in Toledo, Ohio. Our Internet address is www.dana.com. The
inclusion of our website address in this report is an inactive
textual reference only, and is not intended to include or
incorporate by reference the information on our web site into
this report.
As discussed in Item 1. Business
Reorganization Proceedings under the Bankruptcy
Code, and in Notes 1 and 23 to the financials
statements of Item 8, we emerged from bankruptcy on
January 31, 2008. Pursuant to our Plan, all of the issued
and outstanding shares of Prior Dana common stock, par value
$1.00 per share, and any other outstanding equity securities of
Prior Dana, including all options and warrants, were cancelled.
On the Effective Date, we began the process of issuing
100 million shares of Dana common stock, par value $0.01
per share, including approximately 70 million shares for
allowed unsecured nonpriority claims, approximately
28 million additional shares deposited in an account for
future distribution to unsecured nonpriority claimants in
Class 5B under the Plan, approximately 1 million
shares for payment of post-emergence bonuses to union employees
and approximately 1 million shares to pay bonuses to
non-union hourly and salaried non-management employees. See
Item 1 for a discussion of the treatment of other claims
and settlements.
As part of our emergence from Chapter 11 bankruptcy, all
pre-petition claims against the Debtors were addressed as
provided in the Plan, including claims with respect to debt,
pension and postretirement medical obligations, environmental
and other liabilities.
Business
Strategy
We utilized the reorganization process primarily to effect
fundamental changes in our U.S. operations as our long-term
viability depends on our ability to return our
U.S. operations to sustainable profitability.
During 2007, we implemented most of our reorganization
initiatives, and our emergence from bankruptcy finalized many of
these initiatives. Our efforts to improve our margins and reduce
costs have favorably impacted our performance and will help to
mitigate the underlying industry challenges and difficult
business
21
conditions we face. Operating cash flow, repatriated cash from
our overseas operations and amounts borrowed under our Exit
Facility are expected to meet our liquidity needs for 2008. With
the reorganization actions we have achieved, we expect our
U.S. operations will be less dependent on returns from our
foreign operations in the future. The reorganization initiatives
we have implemented include:
|
|
|
|
|
We have obtained substantial price increases from our customers,
which has helped us to improve margins;
|
|
|
|
We have restructured our wage and benefit programs to achieve a
more appropriate labor and benefit cost structure;
|
|
|
|
We have addressed excessive costs and funding requirements of
the legacy postretirement benefit liabilities that we have
accumulated over the years, in part from prior divestitures and
closed operations;
|
|
|
|
We have achieved a permanent reduction and realignment of our
overhead costs; and
|
|
|
|
We are continuing to optimize our manufacturing
footprint by closing facilities and repositioning
our production to lower cost countries.
|
Achievement of many of our objectives has enabled us to mitigate
the effects of the significantly curtailed production since the
second half of 2006 by some of our largest domestic customers,
particularly in the production of SUVs and pickup trucks, which
represent the primary market for our products in the
U.S. These production cuts also adversely impacted our
sales in 2007 in the light vehicle market. Weaker demand in the
U.S. heavy-duty and medium-duty truck markets in 2007 as a
result of pre-buying in 2006 ahead of new emissions rules also
negatively impacted our 2007 performance. However, we expect
that our reorganization initiatives will allow us to achieve
viable long-term U.S. operations despite a challenged
U.S. automotive industry and a cyclical commercial vehicle
market. A more detailed description of initiatives taken during
the reorganization process follows:
Product
Profitability
Following a detailed review of our product programs to identify
unprofitable contracts and meetings with our customers and their
advisors to address under-performing programs, we reached
agreement with most of our major customers resulting in
aggregate pricing improvements of approximately $180 on an
annualized basis.
Labor
and Benefit Costs
In June 2007, we amended our U.S. pension plans for
non-union employees to freeze service credits and benefit
accruals effective July 1, 2007. Actions to reduce other
non-union employee benefits, such as disability and healthcare,
were implemented in the first half of 2007.
In July 2007, we entered into settlement agreements subsequently
amended and then approved by the Bankruptcy Court with two
primary unions representing our active
U.S. employees the International Union, United
Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers of
America (the UAW) and the United Steel, Paper and Forestry,
Rubber, Manufacturing, Energy Allied Industrial and Service
Workers International Union (the USW) which resolve
our collective bargaining issues with these unions and, when
fully implemented, will help us achieve our labor cost reduction
goal (the Union Settlement Agreements). These agreements provide
for (i) collective bargaining agreements for UAW- and
USW-represented employees at our U.S. facilities until
June 1, 2011, and (ii) wage structure modifications
and modifications to pension, health care, short- and long-term
disability and life insurance benefits for the covered union
employees and retirees.
The Union Settlement Agreements also provide for a freeze of
credited service and benefit accruals under Dana-sponsored
defined benefit pension plans for UAW- and USW-represented
employees, effective January 31, 2008 and for future
benefits to be provided under the Steelworkers Pension
Trust
22
(SPT), a multi-employer, USW-sponsored defined benefit pension
plan, based on a
cents-per-hour
contribution for all eligible employees represented by either
the USW or the UAW.
Our labor and benefits cost reduction goal was $60 to $90 of
annual cost savings. With the actions referred to above and
other previously implemented actions, the annualized cost
savings are expected to approximate $80.
Other
Employee and Retiree Benefits
In March 2007, we reached an agreement (subsequently executed in
May after approval by the Bankruptcy Court) with the official
committee of non-unionized retired employees (the Retiree
Committee) to make $78 of cash contributions to a VEBA trust for
non-pension retiree benefits for our non-union retirees, in
exchange for release of our obligations for postretirement
health and welfare benefits for such retirees after
June 30, 2007. We also reached an agreement with the
International Association of Machinists (IAM) (subsequently
approved by the Bankruptcy Court) to pay $2 to resolve all IAM
claims after June 30, 2007 for non-pension retiree benefits
for retirees and active employees represented by the IAM.
In April 2007, we eliminated retiree healthcare benefits
coverage for our active non-union U.S. employees. In July
2007, we reduced long-term disability benefits for non-union
employees.
Under the Union Settlement Agreements, we eliminated
Dana-sponsored healthcare and life insurance benefits for
union-represented retirees and we transferred the obligations to
pay long-term disability benefits to union employees receiving
or entitled to receive disability benefits to the union VEBAs,
effective January 31, 2008. The UAW and the USW established
separate, union-specific VEBAs to provide such benefits to
eligible union-represented employees or retirees after that
date. Shortly after the Effective Date, we contributed $733 to
the UAW and USW VEBAs. An additional contribution of $2 was made
to an escrow account for the benefit of retirees of a divested
business.
As a result of these actions, we have eliminated our
U.S. postretirement healthcare obligations, resulting in
annualized cost savings of approximately $90.
Overhead
Costs
We implemented various initiatives to reduce overhead costs and
we continue to focus on our overhead cost structure. Reductions
in overhead occurred in part as a result of divestiture and
reorganization activities. We expect our reductions in overhead
spending to contribute annual expense savings of approximately
$50.
Manufacturing
Footprint
We identified a number of manufacturing and assembly plants that
carried an excessive cost structure or had excess capacity. We
closed certain locations and consolidated their operations into
lower cost facilities in other countries or into
U.S. facilities that had excess capacity. During 2007, we
completed the closure of fifteen facilities. We will close
additional facilities in 2008 and 2009, and other locations are
implementing work force reductions. We anticipate that our
manufacturing footprint actions will reduce operating costs by
$60 on an annualized basis when fully implemented by 2010.
Our customer pricing initiatives and labor and benefit actions
are substantially completed. The manufacturing footprint and
overhead reduction actions are progressing as planned. We
believe we are positioned to achieve the goals of our
reorganization initiatives and we expect these actions to
positively impact 2008 results of operations by $460 as we
complete the implementation of these initiatives during the year.
During 2007, we completed substantially all of our previously
announced divestitures.
In January 2007, we sold our trailer axle business manufacturing
assets for $28 in cash and recorded an after-tax gain of $14.
23
In March 2007:
|
|
|
|
|
We sold our engine hard parts business to MAHLE and received
cash proceeds of $98 of which $10 remains escrowed pending
satisfaction of certain of our indemnification obligations. We
recorded an after-tax loss of $42 in the first quarter of 2007
in connection with this sale and an after-tax loss of $3 in the
second quarter related to a South American operation.
|
|
|
|
We sold our 30% equity interest in GETRAG to our joint venture
partner, an affiliate of GETRAG, for $207 in cash. An impairment
charge of $58 had been recorded in the fourth quarter of 2006 to
adjust this equity investment to fair value and an additional
charge of $2 after tax was recorded in the first quarter of 2007
based on the value of the investment at the time of closing.
|
In July and August 2007, we completed the sale of our fluid
products hose and tubing business to Orhan Holding A.S. and
certain of its affiliates. Aggregate cash proceeds of $84 were
received from these transactions and an aggregate after-tax gain
of $32 was recorded in the third quarter in connection with the
sale of this business. A final purchase price adjustment is
pending on this sale.
In August 2007, we and certain of our affiliates executed an
axle agreement and related transaction documents providing for a
series of transactions relating to our rights and obligations
under two joint ventures with GETRAG and certain of its
affiliates. These agreements provide for relief from non-compete
provisions in various agreements restricting our ability to
participate in certain markets for axle products other than
through participation in the joint ventures; the grant of a call
option to GETRAG to acquire our ownership interests in the two
joint ventures for a purchase price of $75; our payment to
GETRAG of $11 under certain conditions; the withdrawal, with
prejudice, of bankruptcy claims aggregating approximately $66
filed by GETRAG and one of the joint venture entities relating
to our alleged breach of certain non-compete provisions; the
amendment, assumption, rejection
and/or
termination of certain other agreements between the parties; and
the grant of certain mutual releases by us and various other
parties. In connection with these agreements, $11 was recorded
as liabilities subject to compromise and as a charge to other
income, net in the second quarter based on the determination
that the liability was probable. In October 2007, these
agreements were approved by the Bankruptcy Court and became
effective. The $11 liability was reclassified to other current
liabilities at December 31, 2007.
In September 2007, we completed the sale of our coupled fluid
products business to Coupled Products Acquisition LLC by having
the buyer assume certain liabilities ($18) of the business at
closing. A third-quarter after-tax loss of $23 was recorded in
connection with the sale of this business. A final purchase
price adjustment is pending on this sale.
We completed the sale of a portion of the pump products business
in October 2007, generating proceeds of $7 and a nominal
after-tax gain, which was recorded in the fourth quarter.
During the fourth quarter of 2007, we substantially completed
our divestment of DCC assets. Since announcing the divestment
plan in 2001, when DCCs portfolio assets exceeded $2,200,
we have completed sales leaving us with portfolio assets of $7
at December 31, 2007.
In January 2008, we completed the sale of the remaining assets
of the pump products business to Melling Tool Company generating
proceeds of $5 and an after-tax loss of $1 that will be recorded
in the first quarter of 2008.
Business
Units
We manage our operations globally through two business
units ASG and HVTSG.
ASG focuses on the automotive market and primarily supports
light vehicle OEMs with products for light trucks, SUVs, CUVs,
vans and passenger cars. ASG has five operating segments focused
on specific products for the automotive market: Axle,
Driveshaft, Structures, Sealing and Thermal.
HVTSG supports the OEMs of medium-duty
(Classes 5-7)
and heavy-duty (Class 8) commercial vehicles
(primarily trucks and buses) and off-highway vehicles (primarily
wheeled vehicles used in construction,
24
agricultural and industrial applications). HVTSG has two
operating segments focused on specific markets: Commercial
Vehicle and Off-Highway.
Trends in Our
Markets
Light Vehicle
Markets
North
America
North American light vehicle unit production levels have
declined about 4.5% during the past three years
15.8 million in 2005, 15.3 million in 2006, and
15.0 million in 2007. Within this market, most of the
vehicle platforms that we supply are in the light truck segment.
Light truck unit production levels declined more significantly
during this period about 7.0% with unit
production levels at 9.2 million in 2005, 8.4 million
in 2006 and 8.6 million in 2007. Notably, within the light
truck segment there has also been a significant shift.
Production of
pick-ups,
SUVs and vans have dropped significantly (16% from 2005 to
2007) while production of smaller cross-over vehicles have
increased about 32%. Since a number of our key vehicle platforms
are pick-ups
and SUVs, this change in light truck production mix has had a
significant impact on our sales. The decline in
pick-up and
SUV production levels during the past two years has been driven
in large part by higher fuel prices, as consumer preferences
have increasingly moved toward passenger cars and CUVs, which
have better fuel efficiency.
Vehicle sales in North America during the second half of 2007
were especially sluggish. Concern about high fuel prices
continues to permeate the market, and other negative economic
factors have also risen to the forefront declining
housing starts, tightened credit and increased unemployment. In
response to lower second half 2007 sales, the OEMs reduced
production levels and managed to keep inventory levels in check.
At December 31, 2007, there was a 65 day supply of light
truck inventories in the U.S., which was down slightly from
67 days at the end of 2006.
With the current concerns surrounding fuel prices and other
economic factors, the outlook for the North American vehicle
market for 2008 is extremely cautious, particularly for the
first half of the year. Most forecasts for overall light duty
North American production in 2008 are currently around
14.5 million units a decline of about 3.5% from
2007. In the light truck segment, production levels are expected
to decline somewhat more, about 5.5%. On the vehicle platforms
which have higher Dana product content, we are currently
forecasting a 2008 production decline of around 6% from 2007.
Rest of
World
Outside of North America, light duty production levels have
generally increased or remained relatively flat over the past
three years. Following are the production levels for select
regions over the past three years and as forecasted for 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(millions of units)
|
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
23.9
|
|
|
|
26.1
|
|
|
|
28.3
|
|
|
|
30.1
|
|
Western Europe
|
|
|
16.1
|
|
|
|
15.7
|
|
|
|
16.1
|
|
|
|
16.0
|
|
Eastern Europe
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
5.1
|
|
|
|
6.0
|
|
|
|
6.7
|
|
South America
|
|
|
2.8
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
3.5
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
While the North American market continues to be our largest, our
business strategies have increasingly positioned us to be less
dependent on North America and to grow our business elsewhere in
the world. As indicated in the Results of Operations section,
Danas sales (all markets) outside of North America were
45% of total sales in 2007, up from 37% in 2005, and most of the
existing net new business coming on stream over the next three
years involves programs outside North America.
25
OEM Mix
The declining sales of light vehicles (especially light trucks,
which generally have a higher profit margin than passenger cars)
in North America, as well as losses of market share to
competitors such as Toyota and Nissan, continue to put pressure
on three of our largest customers: Ford, GM and Chrysler. These
three customers accounted for 63% of light truck production in
North America in 2007. Their share of such production in 2006
and 2005 was 65% and 69% (source: Global Insight). We expect any
continuing loss of market share by these customers could result
in their applying renewed pricing pressure on us relative to
existing business and in our efforts to generate new business.
Our discussion of product profitability initiatives in the
Business Strategy section above specifically addresses our
efforts to improve our pricing.
Commercial
Vehicle Markets
North
America
Our commercial vehicle business is significantly impacted by the
North American market, with approximately 85% of our commercial
vehicle sales being to North American customers. As expected,
the implementation of new engine emission regulations at the
beginning of 2007 led to decreased vehicle production this past
year as vehicle owners stepped up their purchases in 2006 to
take advantage of the lower cost of the engines built prior to
the new emission requirements. Production of heavy duty
(Class 8) vehicles in 2007 was about
205,000 units, which is down from 369,000 in 2006 and
334,000 in 2005. The drop off in production levels was less
severe in the medium duty
(Class 5-7)
market, but still significant. Medium duty production in 2007
was around 206,000 units as compared to 265,000 units
in 2006 and 244,000 units in 2005.
As is typical following such an emission regulation change,
production levels are expected to rebound in 2008. We currently
expect Class 8 production levels in 2008 to be around
230,000 units up 12% over 2007, and
Class 5-7
production to come in around 220,000 units an
increase of 7% over 2007. The current commercial vehicle market
is experiencing some of the same effects as the light duty
market with vehicle sales being adversely affected by a weak
housing market and continued high fuel prices. As a consequence,
the first half of 2008 is expected to be somewhat sluggish, with
production picking up more during the second half of the year.
Rest of
World
Outside of North America, commercial vehicle production levels
have generally increased over the past three years. Following
are the production levels for select regions over the past three
years and as forecast for 2008.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(units in thousands)
|
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
925
|
|
|
|
1,090
|
|
|
|
1,270
|
|
|
|
1,352
|
|
Western Europe
|
|
|
475
|
|
|
|
463
|
|
|
|
515
|
|
|
|
510
|
|
Eastern Europe
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
149
|
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
South America
|
|
|
111
|
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
|
134
|
|
|
|
136
|
|
As with our light duty business, our recent strategic
initiatives in the commercial vehicle business have increased
our ability to capitalize on the stronger growth occurring
outside of North America, particularly in Asia Pacific. In June
2007, we purchased a 4% interest in the registered capital of
Dongfeng Dana Axle Co., Ltd. (a commercial vehicle axle
manufacturer in China formerly known as Dongfeng Axle Co., Ltd.)
from Dongfeng Motor Co., Ltd and certain of its affiliates for
$5. Under the purchase agreement, subject to certain conditions,
we agreed to acquire an additional 46% of Dongfeng Dana Axle
Co., Ltd. for approximately $55 within the three years following
our initial investment.
26
Off-Highway
Markets
Over the past three years, our Off-Highway business has become
an increasingly more significant component of our total
operations. With sales of $1,549, it accounted for 18% of our
total sales in 2007. Unlike our on-highway businesses, our
Off-Highway business is larger outside of North America, with
more than 75% of its 2007 sales coming from outside North
America.
We serve several segments of the diverse off-highway market,
including construction, agriculture, mining, material handling
and others. The European and North American construction and
agriculture segments are currently the two largest. Production
levels in these markets over the past three years and as
forecast for 2008 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2008
|
|
|
|
(units in thousands)
|
|
|
Europe
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
185
|
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
197
|
|
|
|
203
|
|
Agriculture
|
|
|
213
|
|
|
|
212
|
|
|
|
204
|
|
|
|
218
|
|
North America
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
90
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
Agriculture
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
118
|
|
|
|
126
|
|
|
|
132
|
|
Similar to the businesses in our other markets, our Off-Highway
business has grown during the past three years in Eastern Europe
and in China, capitalizing on the Asia Pacific growth
opportunities that are also prevalent in this market.
Commodity
Costs
Another challenge we face is the increasing costs of steel and
other raw materials, which has had a significant adverse impact
on our results, and those of other North American automotive
suppliers, for the past several years. Steel suppliers began
assessing price surcharges and increasing base prices during the
first half of 2004, and prices since then have remained at
considerably higher levels.
Two commonly used market-based indicators a Tri
Cities Index for #1 bundled scrap steel (which represents
the monthly average costs in the Chicago, Cleveland and
Pittsburgh ferrous scrap markets, as posted by American Metal
Market, and is used by our domestic steel suppliers to determine
our monthly surcharge) and the spot market price for hot-rolled
sheet steel illustrate the impact. Average scrap
steel prices on the Tri Cities Index during 2007 were more than
50% higher than scrap prices at the end of 2003 and spot market
hot-rolled sheet steel prices during 2007 were more than 60%
higher. After increasing significantly through mid-2006, prices
of scrap and hot-rolled steel subsided some during the second
half of 2006 and first half of 2007. The scrap prices on the Tri
Cities Index were on average in 2007 11% higher than 2006, while
hot-rolled steel spot prices during 2007 were on about 10% lower
than 2006. We have taken actions to mitigate the impact of these
increases, including consolidating purchases, taking advantage
of our customers resale programs where possible, finding
new global steel sources, identifying alternative materials and
redesigning our products to be less dependent on higher cost
steel grades. Nevertheless, steel prices continue to have a
significant impact on our operating profit. During the second
half of 2007, scrap and hot-rolled steel spot steel prices began
increasing, and they have increased even more during early 2008.
Scrap prices at the end of January 2008 are about 40% higher
than mid-year 2007 price levels, while hot-rolled steel is up
nearly 20%.
During the latter part of 2005 and throughout 2007, prices for
raw materials other than steel were volatile. Average prices for
nickel (which is used to manufacture stainless steel) increased
more than 60% in 2006, and increased again in 2007 more than
50%. Importantly, however, while full year 2007 nickel prices
were up on average, prices during the second half of the year
declined significantly with January 2008 nickel
prices being about 20% lower than prices at the end of 2006.
Aluminum prices increased on average 37% in 2006 over 2005
prices, and remained relatively constant throughout
2007 up only about 3% over 2006. As was
27
the case with nickel, aluminum prices during the second half of
2007 declined somewhat with January 2008 prices
being about 12% lower than year end 2006 price levels.
As discussed above, our reorganization initiatives include
working with our customers to recover a greater portion of our
commodity materials costs.
Automotive
Supplier Bankruptcies
Several major U.S. automotive suppliers, in addition to us,
have filed for protection under the Bankruptcy Code since early
2005 including Tower Automotive, Inc., Collins &
Aikman Corporation, Delphi Corporation and Dura Automotive
Systems, Inc. These bankruptcy filings indicate stress in the
North American light vehicle market that could lead to further
filings or to competitor or customer reorganizations or
consolidations that could impact the marketplace and our
business.
New
Business
A continuing major focus for us is growing our revenue through
new business. Based on awards to date, we expect net new
business to contribute approximately $170 to our sales in 2008
and an additional $100 in 2009. Our current level of net new
business is lower than in recent years due, in part, to the
expiration or reduction in some of our larger customer programs
in 2006, including programs to supply certain structural
products to Ford and certain axle and driveshaft products to
Ford and a GM affiliate in Australia. Our 2008 net new
business projection also takes into consideration sales
reductions that we anticipate next year due to the co-sourcing
of a structural products program with Ford. While continuing to
support Ford, GM and Chrysler, we are striving to diversify our
sales across a broader customer base.
United States
Profitability
During the five years preceding our bankruptcy filing in 2006,
our U.S. operations generated losses before income taxes
aggregating approximately $2,000. The Debtor operations
continued to generate significant losses during 2006 with losses
before income taxes exceeding $400, inclusive of $117 of
reorganization expense attributable to our bankruptcy filing and
another $56 of restructuring and impairment charges. While
numerous factors have contributed to our lack of profitability
in the U.S., paramount among them are those discussed earlier in
this report: high raw material costs that we have been
absorbing, customer price reductions that have reduced our
margins, competition from suppliers in countries with lower
labor costs, and accumulated retiree healthcare costs
disproportionate to the scale of our current business. The
initiatives undertaken in the reorganization process discussed
under the Business Strategy section above outline the actions
taken to improve U.S. profitability.
Our loss before income taxes for the Debtors in 2007 increased
slightly to approximately $452 from $443 in 2006. However,
included are increases of $148 of bankruptcy-related
reorganization items and $46 in realignment and impairment
charges. Losses from continuing operations before interest,
reorganization items and income taxes decreased from $253 in
2006 to $115 in 2007. This improvement is reflective, in part,
of the initiatives implemented as part of the bankruptcy
reorganization process which contributed approximately $200 of
profit improvement in 2007, most of which benefited the
U.S. operations.
As discussed above, as we complete the reorganization
initiatives, we expect additional annual profit improvement in
2008. Recognition of the cost savings associated with most of
the benefits program modifications under the settlement
agreement with the unions commenced with our emergence from
bankruptcy. Additional benefits from the manufacturing footprint
actions and overhead reductions are also expected. As such, we
expect to realize a substantial portion of the full $460 of
profit improvement from reorganization initiatives in 2008 with
most of the additional improvement occurring in the U.S.
28
Results of
Operations Summary
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007 to 2006
|
|
|
2006 to 2005
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
8,721
|
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
8,611
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
(107
|
)
|
Cost of sales
|
|
|
8,231
|
|
|
|
8,166
|
|
|
|
8,205
|
|
|
|
65
|
|
|
|
(39
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin
|
|
|
490
|
|
|
|
338
|
|
|
|
406
|
|
|
|
152
|
|
|
|
(68
|
)
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
365
|
|
|
|
419
|
|
|
|
500
|
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
(81
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin less SG&A*
|
|
|
125
|
|
|
|
(81
|
)
|
|
|
(94
|
)
|
|
|
206
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other costs and expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realignment charges, net
|
|
|
205
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
113
|
|
|
|
34
|
|
Impairment of other assets
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
|
|
(145
|
)
|
|
|
181
|
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expense, net of other income
|
|
|
132
|
|
|
|
186
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
163
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before interest, reorganization
items and income taxes
|
|
$
|
(7
|
)
|
|
$
|
(267
|
)
|
|
$
|
(117
|
)
|
|
$
|
260
|
|
|
$
|
(150
|
)
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
$
|
(433
|
)
|
|
$
|
(618
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,175
|
)
|
|
$
|
185
|
|
|
$
|
557
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
$
|
(118
|
)
|
|
$
|
(121
|
)
|
|
$
|
(434
|
)
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
313
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(551
|
)
|
|
$
|
(739
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
$
|
188
|
|
|
$
|
866
|
|
|
|
|
* |
|
Gross margin less SG&A is a non-GAAP financial measure
derived by excluding realignment charges, impairments and other
income, net from the most closely related GAAP measure which is
income from continuing operations before interest,
reorganization items and income taxes. We believe this non-GAAP
measure is useful for an understanding of our ongoing operations
because it excludes other income and expense items which are
generally not expected to be part of our ongoing business.
Certain reclassifications were made to conform 2005 and 2006 to
the 2007 reporting schedules. Intercompany sales and cost of
sales are included in our gross margin calculation. |
Results of
Operations (2007 versus 2006)
Geographic Sales,
Segment Sales and Gross Margin Analysis (2007 versus
2006)
The tables below show changes in our sales by geographic region,
business unit and segment for the years ended December 31,
2007 and 2006.
Geographic Sales
Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Change Due To
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Acquisitions/
|
|
|
Organic
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Effects
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
4,791
|
|
|
$
|
5,171
|
|
|
$
|
(380
|
)
|
|
$
|
26
|
|
|
$
|
(90
|
)
|
|
$
|
(316
|
)
|
Europe
|
|
|
2,256
|
|
|
|
1,856
|
|
|
|
400
|
|
|
|
192
|
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
231
|
|
South America
|
|
|
1,007
|
|
|
|
854
|
|
|
|
153
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
85
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
667
|
|
|
|
623
|
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,721
|
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
348
|
|
|
$
|
(133
|
)
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales increased $217, or 2.6%, from 2006 to 2007. Currency
movements increased 2007 sales by $348 due to an overall weaker
U.S. dollar compared to a number of the major currencies in
other global markets
29
where we conduct business. Sales in 2007 were reduced by net
divestiture impacts, principally due to a $152 reduction
resulting from the sale of our trailer axle business in January
2007. Partially offsetting this loss of sales was an increase
resulting from the July 2006 purchase of the axle and driveshaft
businesses previously owned by Spicer S.A., our equity affiliate
in Mexico. Excluding currency and net divestiture effects,
organic sales in 2007 were relatively flat compared to 2006.
Organic change is the
period-on-period
measure of the change in sales that excludes the effects of
currency movements, acquisitions and divestitures.
Regionally, North American sales were down $380 in 2007, or
7.3%. A stronger Canadian dollar increased sales slightly, while
the divestiture of the trailer axle business net of additional
axle and driveshaft business acquired from our previous equity
affiliate in Mexico decreased sales by $90. Excluding these
effects, organic sales were down $316, or 6.1%. Lower production
levels in the North American commercial vehicle market were the
primary contributor to lower organic sales. Class 8 vehicle
production was down more than 40% while medium duty production
of
Class 5-7
vehicles was down more than 20%. New engine emission
requirements effective at the beginning of 2007 increased costs
and led many vehicle owners to accelerate their purchases in
2006. Consequently, production levels in 2006 benefited from
this pull forward of customer demand, while 2007 levels were
lower. In North America, our 2007 organic sales to the
commercial vehicle market were down more than $400 compared to
2006. Partially offsetting the impact of lower commercial
vehicle build was higher production levels in the North American
light truck market. Year over year light truck production
increased 2.2%, with the vehicle platforms on which we have our
highest content up even more. Sales to the off-highway market
also increased in 2007, principally from new customer programs.
Additionally, North American sales in 2007 benefited from
pricing improvements of approximately $165.
Sales in Europe increased $400 in 2007 an increase
of 21.6%. Stronger European currencies relative to the
U.S. dollar accounted for $192 of the increase. The organic
sales increase of $231 was due in part to net new business in
2007 of approximately $150. Additionally, production levels in
two of our key markets the European light vehicle
market and the off-highway market were somewhat
stronger in 2007 than in 2006. In South America, the sales
increase of $153 resulted from somewhat stronger year-over-year
production levels in our major vehicular markets, and also from
stronger currencies in this region. Sales in Asia Pacific
similarly increased due to currencies in that region also
strengthening against the U.S. dollar.
Segment Sales
Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Change Due To
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Acquisitions/
|
|
|
Organic
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Effects
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Axle
|
|
$
|
2,627
|
|
|
$
|
2,230
|
|
|
$
|
397
|
|
|
$
|
92
|
|
|
$
|
20
|
|
|
$
|
285
|
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
1,200
|
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(9
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
720
|
|
|
|
679
|
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
Thermal
|
|
|
291
|
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
Structures
|
|
|
1,069
|
|
|
|
1,174
|
|
|
|
(105
|
)
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(131
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
(50
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(24
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total ASG
|
|
|
5,934
|
|
|
|
5,567
|
|
|
|
367
|
|
|
|
229
|
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
1,235
|
|
|
|
1,683
|
|
|
|
(448
|
)
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
|
|
(314
|
)
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
1,549
|
|
|
|
1,231
|
|
|
|
318
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
217
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total HVTSG
|
|
|
2,784
|
|
|
|
2,914
|
|
|
|
(130
|
)
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
|
|
(97
|
)
|
Other Operations
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,721
|
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
217
|
|
|
$
|
348
|
|
|
$
|
(133
|
)
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
Business
Segment Review
Customer-related pricing improvements contributed approximately
$150 to organic sales growth in our ASG segments in 2007, while
the net effects of significantly lower commercial vehicle
production, somewhat higher light vehicle production and sales
mix reduced organic sales. In our Axle segment, pricing
improvements, new customer programs and higher production levels
contributed to the higher sales. Our Driveshaft segment sells to
the commercial vehicle market as well as the light vehicle
market. The significant decline in commercial vehicle production
levels more than offset stronger light duty production levels
and pricing improvements, leading to a slight decline in this
units organic sales. Neither the Thermal nor Sealing
segment benefited significantly from pricing improvement or new
business; consequently, the organic sales change in these
operations was primarily due to production level changes and
business mix. In Structures, higher sales due to stronger
production levels and improved pricing were more than offset by
discontinued programs, including the expiration of a frame
program with Ford in 2006.
In the HVTSG, our Commercial Vehicle segment is heavily
concentrated in the North American market and the organic sales
decline of 18.7% in this segment was primarily due to the drop
in North American production levels discussed in the regional
review. Organic sales in the Off-Highway segment have benefited
from stronger production levels and sales from new programs.
With its significant European presence, this segments
sales also benefited from the stronger euro.
31
Margin
Analysis
The chart below shows our business unit and segment margin
analysis for the years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Sales
|
|
|
Increase/
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Gross margin:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
5.2
|
%
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
|
|
0.9
|
%
|
Axle
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
7.4
|
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
(2.4
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
12.9
|
|
|
|
13.3
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Thermal
|
|
|
8.4
|
|
|
|
12.9
|
|
|
|
(4.5
|
)
|
Structures
|
|
|
5.0
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
8.8
|
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
5.8
|
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
3.3
|
%
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)%
|
Axle
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
6.6
|
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Thermal
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
0.7
|
|
Structures
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
3.9
|
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin less SG&A:*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
1.9
|
%
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
|
|
1.2
|
%
|
Axle
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
|
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
6.3
|
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
(0.6
|
)
|
Thermal
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
(5.2
|
)
|
Structures
|
|
|
3.3
|
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
5.4
|
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
8.5
|
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
0.2
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
1.4
|
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Gross margin less SG&A is a
non-GAAP financial measure derived by excluding realignment
charges, impairments and other income, net from the most closely
related GAAP measure, which is income from continuing operations
before interest, reorganization items and income taxes. We
believe this non-GAAP measure is useful for an understanding of
our ongoing operations because it excludes other income and
expense items which are generally not expected to be part of our
ongoing business. Intercompany sales and cost of sales are
included in our gross margin calculation.
|
32
Automotive
Systems Group
In ASG, gross margin less SG&A improved 1.2%, from 0.7% in
2006 to 1.9% in 2007. Customer pricing improvements of
approximately $150 was the principal factor increasing ASG
margins. Reductions to non-union benefit plans also contributed
to some additional margin. Partially offsetting these
improvements were negative impacts from sales mix and expiration
of higher margin programs.
In the Axle segment, the net margin improvement was 2.0%.
Customer pricing actions increased margins in Axle by
approximately $60, or 2.2% of sales. Non-union employee benefit
plan reductions and lower material costs also contributed to
some margin improvement. Although Axle sales were up
significantly in 2007, the sales mix was unfavorable with a
significant portion of the higher sales coming from vehicle
platforms with lower margins.
The Driveshaft segment experienced a net margin decline of 1.8%
despite a year-over-year sales increase. Adverse sales mix was a
major factor as the Driveshaft segment sells to customers in
both the light duty automotive market as well as the commercial
vehicle market. Lower production levels in the North American
commercial vehicle market reduced Driveshaft sales by about $90.
Margins on the commercial vehicle business are higher than the
light duty automotive programs, thereby negatively impacting
overall margins. Premium freight cost associated with
operational inefficiencies reduced margins by about $10.
Partially offsetting the negative margin effects of the adverse
sales mix and some operational inefficiencies was margin
improvement of approximately $27 2.2% of
sales due to customer pricing and lower material
costs.
Net margins in the Sealing segment were down 0.6%, primarily due
to higher material costs of approximately $20, or 2.7% of sales.
Stainless steel is a major material component for this business,
and the average cost of stainless steel in 2007 was about 67%
higher than in 2006. The higher raw material cost was partially
offset by margin improvements from non-union benefit plan
reductions and operational cost reduction actions.
Our Thermal segment experienced a net margin decline of 5.2% in
2007. Operational inefficiencies and warranty cost associated
with our European operation reduced margins by about $5, and
higher start up costs associated with our Hungary and China
operations negatively impacted margins by $3. Additionally, the
strengthening of the Canadian dollar against the
U.S. dollar also negatively impacts our margin in this
business as certain product manufactured in Canada is sold in
U.S. dollars.
In our Structures segment, net margins increased 4.9%, with
customer pricing actions contributing approximately $65, or 6.1%
of sales. This margin improvement was partially offset by
unfavorable margin effects associated with the lower sales in
this unit, principally due to expiration of two significant
customer programs.
Heavy Vehicle
Technology and Systems
Our Heavy Vehicle gross margins less SG&A increased 1.3% in
2007, benefiting primarily from increased pricing and stronger
off-highway sales levels. Commercial Vehicle segment margins
improved 0.6%, despite significantly lower sales due to reduced
production levels in the North American market. More than
offsetting the unfavorable margin impact of the lower production
levels was increased pricing which improved margins by about
$23, or 1.9% of sales. In the Off-Highway segment, net margins
improved 0.2%. Higher sales relative to fixed costs and reduced
material costs benefited margins. Margins were negatively
impacted by a stronger euro as we manufacture some product in
Europe for sale in dollars to the U.S. Higher warranty
costs of $7 also reduced our margins in this business.
Consolidated
Consolidated gross margin less SG&A includes corporate
expenses and other costs not allocated to the business units of
$146, or 1.7% of sales, in 2007 as compared to $240, or 2.8% of
sales, in 2006. This improvement in consolidated margins of 2.4%
results primarily from our overall efforts to control overhead
through headcount reduction, limited wage increases and cutbacks
in discretionary spending. Also
33
contributing to this margin improvement were the benefit plan
reductions effectuated in 2007 which eliminated retiree
postretirement benefits other than pension (OPEB) benefits for
non-union active employees and retirees and discontinued future
service accruals under non-union employee pension plans.
Realignment
charges
Realignment charges during 2007 included $136 of cost relating
to settlement of pension obligations in the United Kingdom (as
described more fully in Note 6 to the financial statements
in Item 8). Other realignment charges in 2007 and the
charges in 2006 are primarily costs associated with the
continuing manufacturing footprint optimization actions
described in the Business Strategy section.
Impairment of
goodwill and other assets
Our thermal business has experienced significant margin erosion
in recent years resulting from the higher cost of commodities,
especially aluminum. In connection with our annual assessment of
goodwill at December 31, 2007, we determined that goodwill
in our Thermal business segment was impaired and recorded a
charge of $89. The impairment charges in 2006 include charges of
$176 to reduce lease and other assets in DCC to their fair value
less cost to sell, a charge of $58 to adjust our equity
investment in GETRAG to fair value based on an
other-than-temporary decline in value related to the March 2007
sale of this investment, and a $46 charge to write off the
goodwill in our Axle business. Each of these charges is
described further in Notes 4 and 9 of the financial
statements in Item 8.
Other income,
net
Foreign currency transaction gains increased Other income
(expense) by $31 in 2007. During 2007, certain intercompany
loans receivable held by the Debtors that were previously
designated as invested indefinitely were identified for
repayment through near-term repatriation actions. As a
consequence, exchange rate movements on these loans and others
not permanently invested generated currency gains of $44 during
2007. Currency losses, net, elsewhere reduced other income in
2007 by $9. DCC income was lower by $7 in 2007 as we continued
to sell the remaining portfolio assets in this operation. The
2007 Other income, net, amount also includes an expense of $11
associated with settling a contractual matter with an investor
in one of our equity investments. See Note 21 to the
financial statements in Item 8 for additional components of
other income (expense).
Interest
expense
As a result of our Chapter 11 reorganization process, a
substantial portion of our debt obligations are recorded as
subject to compromise in our consolidated financial statements
included herein. During the bankruptcy reorganization process,
interest expense was no longer accrued on these obligations. The
post-filing interest expense not recognized on these obligations
amounted to $108 in 2007 and $89 in 2006.
Reorganization
items, net
Reorganization items are expenses directly attributed to our
Chapter 11 reorganization process. See Note 3 to our
financial statements in Item 8 of this report for a summary
of these costs. Higher professional advisory fees in 2007 were
due to a full year of reorganization activity, including the
completion of the settlement agreements with the unions and the
confirmation of our Plan. Higher contract rejection and claim
settlement costs in 2007 resulted from specific actions related
to contract settlements made to facilitate the reorganization
process. These higher settlement costs were partially offset by
a $56 credit to reorganization items to reduce liabilities for
long-term disability to amounts allowed by the Bankruptcy Court
for filed claims. Additional information relating to
Reorganization items is provided in Note 3 to the financial
statements in Item 8.
34
Income tax
benefit (expense)
Our reported income tax expense for 2007 was $62 as compared to
an expected benefit of $135 derived by applying the U.S. federal
income tax rate of 35% to reported income before tax. Among the
factors contributing to the higher tax expense are losses
generated in countries such as the U.S. and U.K. where we
determined that future taxable income was not likely to be
sufficient to realize existing net deferred tax assets. As a
consequence, until such time that it is determined that future
taxable income will be sufficient to realize deferred tax
assets, the tax benefits from losses in these countries are
generally offset with a valuation allowance. During 2007, we
incurred $136 of charges relating to the settlement of pension
obligations in the U.K., and the tax benefit associated with
these charges was offset with valuation allowances. Although we
have a full valuation allowance against net deferred tax assets
in the U.S., as discussed in Note 20 to the financial statements
in Item 8, the level of other comprehensive income generated
during 2007 in the U.S. enabled the recognition of $120 of tax
benefits on U.S. losses before income taxes. The net effect on
2007 income tax expense of recording valuation allowances
against deferred tax assets in the U.S., U.K. and other
countries was $37.
Other factors resulting in reported income tax expense being
higher than that expected by applying the U.S. rate of 35% were
non-deductible expenses and recognition of costs associated with
repatriation of undistributed earnings of operations outside the
U.S. Income before taxes included goodwill impairment charges,
certain reorganization costs and other items which are not
deductible for income tax purposes. These items resulted in
approximately $123 of higher reported income tax than that
expected using the U.S. rate of 35%. The recognition of taxes
associated with the planned repatriation of non-U.S. earnings
(also described in Note 20 to the financial statements in
Item 8) resulted in a charge of $37.
The primary factor resulting in income tax expense of $66 during
2006, as compared to a tax benefit of $200 that would be
expected based on the 35% U.S. federal income tax rate, was the
inability to recognize tax benefits on U.S. losses as a result
of the determination in 2005 that future taxable income was not
likely to ensure realization of net deferred tax assets. Also
impacting the rate differential was $46 of goodwill impairment
charges which are not deductible for income tax purposes.
Discontinued
operations
Losses from discontinued operations were $118 and $121, net of
tax, in 2007 and 2006. Discontinued operations in both years
included the engine hard parts, fluid routing and pump products
businesses held for sale at the end of 2006 and 2005. The 2007
amount included net losses of $36 recognized upon completion of
the sale, while the 2006 results included pre-tax impairment
charges of $137 that were required to reduce the net book value
of these businesses to expected fair value less cost to sell.
The discontinued operations results in 2007 also include charges
of $20 in connection with a bankruptcy claim settlement with the
purchaser of a previously sold discontinued business and charges
of $17 for settlement of pension obligations relating to
discontinued businesses. See Note 5 to the financial
statements in Item 8 for additional information relating to
the discontinued operations.
35
Results of
Operations (2006 versus 2005)
Geographic Sales,
Segment Sales and Gross Margin Analysis (2006 versus
2005)
The tables below show changes in our sales by geographic region,
business unit and segment for the years ended December 31,
2006 and 2005.
Geographic Sales
Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Change Due To
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Acquisitions/
|
|
|
Organic
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Effects
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
North America
|
|
$
|
5,171
|
|
|
$
|
5,383
|
|
|
$
|
(212
|
)
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
32
|
|
|
$
|
(296
|
)
|
Europe
|
|
|
1,856
|
|
|
|
1,623
|
|
|
|
233
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
215
|
|
South America
|
|
|
854
|
|
|
|
818
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
24
|
|
Asia Pacific
|
|
|
623
|
|
|
|
787
|
|
|
|
(164
|
)
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(159
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
8,611
|
|
|
$
|
(107
|
)
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales decreased $107, or 1.2%, from 2005 to 2006. Currency
movements increased 2006 sales by $94 due to an overall weaker
U.S. dollar compared to a number of the major currencies in
other global markets where we conduct business. Sales in 2006
also benefited from net acquisitions, primarily the purchase of
the axle and driveshaft businesses previously owned by Spicer
S.A., our equity affiliate in Mexico. Excluding currency and
acquisition effects, we experienced an organic sales decline of
$216, or 2.5%, in 2006 compared to 2005. Organic change is the
period-on-period
measure of the change in sales that excludes the effects of
currency movements, acquisitions and divestitures.
Regionally, our North American sales were down $212 in 2006, or
3.9%. A stronger Canadian dollar increased sales as did the
acquisition of the axle and driveshaft business of our previous
equity affiliate in Mexico. Excluding the effect of these
increases, the organic sales decline was $296, or 5.5%,
principally due to lower production levels in the North American
light vehicle market. In our primary market light
trucks production levels in 2006 were down about 9%.
Within this market, production levels on vehicles with
significant Dana content primarily pickups and
SUVs were down about 12%. Partially offsetting the
effects of lower light truck production levels was net new
business of approximately $240 which came on stream during 2006
and a stronger commercial vehicle market, where Class B
heavy duty production was up 10% and
Class 5-7
medium duty production was up 9%.
Sales in Europe increased $233, mostly due to increases from net
new business. Production levels in two of our key
markets the European light vehicle market and the
off-highway market were somewhat stronger in 2006
than in 2005. In South America, comparable year-over-year
production levels in our major vehicular markets led to
relatively comparable year-over-year sales. In Asia Pacific,
sales declined significantly from 2005, by $164, due primarily
to expiration of an axle program in Australia with Holden Ltd.,
a subsidiary of GM.
36
Segment Sales
Analysis
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount of Change Due To
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase/
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Acquisitions/
|
|
|
Organic
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Effects
|
|
|
Divestitures
|
|
|
Change
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Axle
|
|
$
|
2,230
|
|
|
$
|
2,448
|
|
|
$
|
(218
|
)
|
|
$
|
10
|
|
|
$
|
35
|
|
|
$
|
(263
|
)
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
1,124
|
|
|
|
1,088
|
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
(11
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
679
|
|
|
|
661
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13
|
|
Thermal
|
|
|
283
|
|
|
|
312
|
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
Structures
|
|
|
1,174
|
|
|
|
1,288
|
|
|
|
(114
|
)
|
|
|
28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(142
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
77
|
|
|
|
144
|
|
|
|
(67
|
)
|
|
|
(1
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total ASG
|
|
|
5,567
|
|
|
|
5,941
|
|
|
|
(374
|
)
|
|
|
76
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
|
(465
|
)
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
1,683
|
|
|
|
1,540
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
137
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
1,231
|
|
|
|
1,100
|
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total HVTSG
|
|
|
2,914
|
|
|
|
2,640
|
|
|
|
274
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
256
|
|
Other Operations
|
|
|
23
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
8,611
|
|
|
$
|
(107
|
)
|
|
$
|
94
|
|
|
$
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By operating segment, the organic sales declines occurred in the
segments of ASG. The North American light truck market, where
production levels were down about 9% in 2006, is a major market
for each of the ASG operating segments. The sales decrease in
the Axle segment also reflects the expiration of the Holden Ltd.
Axle program in Australia. Increased sales from new axle
programs in 2006 helped mitigate the reduced sales from lower
North America production levels and the loss of the Australian
business.
Our Driveshaft segment serves both light vehicle and commercial
vehicle original equipment customers. As such, the stronger
commercial vehicle market in 2006 in North America helped to
offset the reduced sales from lower production on the light
truck side of the business.
Our Sealing segment, like Driveshaft, supplies product to the
commercial vehicle and off-highway markets as well as the
consumer-based light vehicle markets, thereby offsetting the
impact of lower 2006 North American light vehicle production. In
the Thermal segment, we are more heavily concentrated on the
North American market. Consequently, our sales decline here is
largely driven by the lower production levels of North American
light vehicles. Similarly, in Structures, a number of our key
programs involve light truck platforms for the North American
market, driving the lower sales in this segment.
In the HVTSG, our Commercial Vehicle segment is primarily
focused on North America where Class 8 heavy
duty production was up 10% in 2006 and
Class 5-7
medium duty production was up 9%. Our Off-Highway segment, on
the other hand, has significant business in Europe, as well as
in North America. Each of these markets remained relatively
strong in 2006, with the production requirements of our major
customers up slightly or relatively comparable year-over-year.
Sales in this segment also benefited from net new business in
2006.
37
Margin
Analysis
The chart below shows our business unit and segment margin
analysis for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As a Percentage
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
of Sales
|
|
|
Increase/
|
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
(Decrease)
|
|
|
Gross margin:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
4.3
|
%
|
|
|
5.9
|
%
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)%
|
Axle
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
9.8
|
|
|
|
11.5
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
13.3
|
|
|
|
14.6
|
|
|
|
(1.3
|
)
|
Thermal
|
|
|
12.9
|
|
|
|
21.3
|
|
|
|
(8.4
|
)
|
Structures
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
(1.7
|
)
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
7.3
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
|
|
3.8
|
|
|
|
0.6
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
|
|
0.3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
|
|
3.6
|
%
|
|
|
|
%
|
Axle
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
|
|
0.5
|
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
3.6
|
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
Sealing
|
|
|
6.4
|
|
|
|
6.8
|
|
|
|
(0.4
|
)
|
Thermal
|
|
|
4.0
|
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
0.8
|
|
Structures
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
|
|
2.2
|
|
|
|
(0.3
|
)
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
3.1
|
|
|
|
5.2
|
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
|
|
3.4
|
|
|
|
(0.8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross margin less SG&A:*
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ASG
|
|
|
0.7
|
%
|
|
|
2.3
|
%
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)%
|
Axle
|
|
|
(2.3
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(2.1
|
)
|
Driveshaft
|
|
|
6.1
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
(1.8
|
)
|
Sealing
|
|
|
6.9
|
|
|
|
7.8
|
|
|
|
(0.9
|
)
|
Thermal
|
|
|
8.9
|
|
|
|
18.1
|
|
|
|
(9.2
|
)
|
Structures
|
|
|
(1.6
|
)
|
|
|
(0.2
|
)
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
HVTSG
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
2.1
|
|
Commercial Vehicle
|
|
|
1.3
|
|
|
|
(1.4
|
)
|
|
|
2.7
|
|
Off-Highway
|
|
|
8.3
|
|
|
|
7.2
|
|
|
|
1.1
|
|
Consolidated
|
|
|
(1.0
|
)
|
|
|
(1.1
|
)
|
|
|
0.1
|
|
|
|
|
*
|
|
Gross margin less SG&A is a
non-GAAP financial measure derived by excluding realignment
charges, impairments and other income, net from the most closely
related GAAP measure, which is income from continuing operations
before interest, reorganization items and income taxes. We
believe this non-GAAP measure is useful for an understanding of
our ongoing operations because it excludes other income and
expense items which are generally not expected to be part of our
ongoing business. Intercompany sales and cost of sales are
included in our gross margin calculation.
|
38
Automotive
Systems
In ASG, gross margin less SG&A declined 1.6%, from 2.3% in
2005 to 0.7% in 2006. Lower sales of $374 contributed to the
margin decline, as we were unable to proportionately reduce
fixed costs.
In the Axle segment, the net margin decline was 2.1%. The margin
decline resulted in part from lower sales relative to fixed
costs. Additionally, the acquired Mexican axle operations of our
previous equity affiliate contributed losses of $3. Higher
premium freight costs to prevent disruption to customer
schedules mostly during the first half of the year
when we were managing the business disruption in the aftermath
of our bankruptcy filing and manufacturing
inefficiencies in our Venezuelan foundry operations resulted in
higher cost of $12. Partially offsetting these reductions to
Axle margins in 2006 were lower warranty expenses of $15,
primarily due to two programs which required higher provisions
in 2005, and lower overall material costs in 2006
mostly due to reduced steel cost.
The Driveshaft segment experienced a net margin decline of 1.8%
despite a year-over-year sales increase. The acquired Mexican
driveshaft operations from our previous equity affiliate
contributed losses of $6. Launch costs and competitive pricing
on a new light truck program in 2006 resulted in losses of
approximately $7.
Net margins in the Sealing segment were down 0.9%, primarily due
to higher material costs of $4 mostly due to the
higher costs of stainless steel, a major material component for
this business. Also contributing to the margin decline were
facility closure and asset impairment costs of $3.
Our Thermal segment experienced a significant sales decline in
2006, resulting in lower sales relative to fixed costs.
Additionally, higher material costs mostly due to
the high content of aluminum in this
business reduced margins by $6.
In our Structures segment, the margin decline was largely
attributed to an 8.8% reduction in sales, with the margin
reduction on the lost sales not offset by proportionate fixed
cost reductions. Program
start-up
costs were also higher in 2006. Partially offsetting these
margin reductions were lower overall material costs, principally
due to savings from purchasing more steel under customer re-sale
programs.
Heavy Vehicle
Technology and Systems
Unlike the ASG business, Heavy Vehicle gross margins less
SG&A benefited in 2006 from stronger sales levels,
increasing 2.1% from 2.0% in 2005 to 4.1% in 2006. Commercial
Vehicle segment net margins improved 2.7%. In addition to the
contribution from higher sales, Commercial Vehicle margins
benefited from price increases of $18, largely to help defray
the higher costs absorbed in previous years due to increased
material costs.
Margins also increased in 2006 as realignments of the operations
and other improvements addressed the manufacturing
inefficiencies which negatively impacted this business in 2005.
Lower overall material cost, due in part to more effective use
of steel grades and resourcing to lower cost steel suppliers,
also benefited margins slightly in this business. In the
Off-Highway segment, net margins improved 1.1%. Higher sales
relative to fixed costs contributed to some of the margin
improvement, with most of the remaining improvement coming from
reductions in material cost.
Consolidated
Consolidated gross margin less SG&A includes corporate
expenses and other costs not allocated to the business units of
$240, or 2.8% of sales, in 2006 as compared to $285, or 3.3% of
sales, in 2005. This improvement in consolidated margins of 0.1%
largely reflects our overall efforts to reduce overhead through
headcount reduction, limited wage increases, suspension of
benefits and cutbacks in discretionary spending.
39
Impairment of
goodwill and other assets
As discussed in Note 4 to the financial statements in
Item 8, an impairment charge of $165 was recorded in the
third quarter of 2006 to reduce lease and other assets in DCC to
their fair value less cost to sell. Additional impairment
charges in 2006 of $11 were recorded based on the planned sales
of specific DCC investments. DCC reviews its investments for
impairment on a quarterly basis. An impairment charge of $58 was
recorded in the fourth quarter of 2006 to adjust our equity
investment in GETRAG to fair value based on an
other-than-temporary decline in value related to the March 2007
sale of this investment.
As discussed in Note 4 to the financial statements in
Item 8, a $46 charge was taken in 2006 to write off the
goodwill in our Axle business. In 2005, we wrote off the
remaining goodwill in our Structures and Commercial Vehicles
businesses.
Realignment
charges
Realignment charges are discussed in Note 6 to the
financial statements in Item 8. These charges relate
primarily to employee separation and exit costs associated with
facility closures.
Other income,
net
Other income, net for 2006 was up $52 compared to 2005. The
increase was due primarily to $28 in losses from divestitures
and joint venture dissolutions in 2005, and the inclusion of
gains of $10 from such activities in 2006. Additionally, DCC
income, net of gains and losses on asset sales, was $14 higher
in 2006 than 2005. See Note 21 to the financial statements
in Item 8 for additional components of other income
(expense).
Interest
expense
As a result of our Chapter 11 reorganization process, a
substantial portion of our debt obligations are recorded as
subject to compromise in the financial statements included
herein. Effective with our filing for reorganization under
Chapter 11, interest expense is no longer accrued on these
obligations. The post-petition interest expense not recognized
in 2006 on these obligations amounted to $89.
Reorganization
items
Reorganization items are primarily expenses directly attributed
to our Chapter 11 reorganization process. See Note 3
to the financial statements in Item 8 for a summary of
these costs. Reorganization items reported in 2006 included
professional advisory fees, lease rejection costs, debt
valuation adjustments on pre-petition liabilities and
underwriting fees related to the DIP Credit Agreement. The debt
valuation adjustments and DIP Credit Agreement underwriting fees
were one-time charges associated with the initial phase of the
reorganization.
Income tax
benefit (expense)
The primary factor resulting in income tax expense of $66 during
2006, as compared to a tax benefit of $200 that would be
expected based on the 35% U.S. statutory income tax rate,
was the discontinued recognition of tax benefits on
U.S. losses. Also impacting this rate differential was $46
of goodwill impairment charges which are not deductible for
income tax purposes.
The 2005 results included a charge of $817 for placing a
valuation allowance against our net U.S. deferred tax
assets. Additional valuation allowances of $13 were also
provided in 2005 against net deferred tax assets in the U.K.
These provisions were the principal reason for tax expense of
$924 recognized in 2005 differing from a tax benefit of $100
that would be expected at a 35% federal U.S. tax rate.
Discontinued
operations
Losses from discontinued operations were $121 and $434 in 2006
and 2005. Discontinued operations in both years included the
engine hard parts, fluid routing and pump products businesses
held for sale at the
40
end of 2006 and 2005. The net losses included pre-tax impairment
charges of $137 in 2006 and $411 in 2005 that were required to
reduce the net book value of these businesses to expected fair
value less cost to sell. See Note 5 to the financial
statements in Item 8 for additional information relating to
the discontinued operations.
Liquidity
During 2007, we took the following steps to ensure adequate
liquidity for all of our operations and for the funding of our
realignment initiatives.
|
|
|
|
|
Increased the size of our DIP Credit Agreement;
|
|
|
|
Negotiated settlements with the Retiree Committee and the IAM
related to postretirement, non-pension benefits;
|
|
|
|
Sold our equity interest in GETRAG to our joint venture partner;
|
|
|
|
Sold our engine hard parts and fluid products businesses;
|
|
|
|
Sold our trailer axle business; and
|
|
|
|
Established a $225 five-year accounts receivable securitization
program with respect to our European operations.
|
As a result of these actions, we were able to finance our
business through our emergence from bankruptcy. The following
table summarizes our global liquidity at December 31, 2007.
|
|
|
|
|
Cash
|
|
$
|
1,271
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits supporting obligations
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
Cash in less than wholly-owned subsidiaries
|
|
|
(88
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available cash
|
|
|
1,072
|
|
Additional cash availability from:
|
|
|
|
|
Lines of credit in the U.S., Canada and Europe
|
|
|
367
|
|
Additional lines of credit supported by letters of credit from
the above facilities
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total global liquidity
|
|
$
|
1,481
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41
Liquidity upon
emergence from Bankruptcy
In connection with our emergence from bankruptcy we received
cash proceeds from a new exit financing facility that included a
$650 Revolving Facility and a Term Facility in the amount of
$1,430 and from the issuance of $790 of newly-authorized shares
of preferred stock. The net cash proceeds received from the exit
financing facility and preferred stock issuance were used to
repay the outstanding balance of the DIP Credit Facility and
satisfy other reorganization-related obligations. The following
table is a pro-forma summary of the impact of these new
facilities on our global liquidity after giving effect to cash
payments made or to be made following emergence. The cash
proceeds received for the exit financing facility and preferred
stock are net of original issue discount, commitment fees and
other issuance costs, fees and expenses.
|
|
|
|
|
Cash at December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
1,271
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits supporting obligations
|
|
|
(111
|
)
|
Cash in less than wholly-owned subsidiaries
|
|
|
(88
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available cash
|
|
|
1,072
|
|
Additional cash availability from:
|
|
|
|
|
Exit Facility funding (term loan)
|
|
|
1,276
|
|
Issuance of preferred stock plus interest received
|
|
|
773
|
|
Exit Facility revolving credit
|
|
|
330
|
|
European Receivable Facility
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,412
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
Repayment of DIP Credit Agreement with interest
|
|
|
(901
|
)
|
VEBA Contributions
|
|
|
(788
|
)
|
Fees and Claims Settlements under the Plan paid or
to be paid
|
|
|
(323
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,012
|
)
|
Additional lines of credit supported by letters of credit from
the above facilities
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro-forma liquidity upon emergence
|
|
$
|
1,514
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
With the additional funding and availability, we believe we have
adequate availability to fund our operations for at least the
next twelve months.
Cash Flow
Summary
A summary of the changes in cash and cash equivalents for the
years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 is shown in
the following tables:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash flow summary:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
704
|
|
|
$
|
762
|
|
|
$
|
634
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
|
(52
|
)
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
(216
|
)
|
Cash provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
348
|
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
Cash provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
|
|
398
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
128
|
|
Impact of foreign exchange and discontinued operations
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period
|
|
$
|
1,271
|
|
|
$
|
704
|
|
|
$
|
762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash from Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(551
|
)
|
|
$
|
(739
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,605
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
279
|
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
310
|
|
Impairment and divestiture-related charges
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
|
405
|
|
|
|
515
|
|
Non-cash portion of U.K. pension charge
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reorganization items, net of payments
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPEB payments in excess of expense
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment to VEBAs for postretirement benefits
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
751
|
|
Unremitted earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(40
|
)
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(56
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(135
|
)
|
|
|
(147
|
)
|
|
|
(45
|
)
|
Change in working capital
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
|
199
|
|
|
|
(171
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
$
|
(52
|
)
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Working capital provided $83 of cash for operating activities in
2007, as compared to a source of $199 in 2006 and use of $171 in
2005.
Increased accounts payable was the primary source of cash from
working capital, generating $110 million in 2007.
Subsequent to our bankruptcy filing in March 2006, shorter
payment terms with suppliers led to lower accounts payable.
During the latter part of 2007, as our reorganization activities
evolved, we were successful in obtaining longer payment terms
that were more reflective of those in effect before our
bankruptcy filing.
Working capital was also a source of $199 of cash in 2006. This
was primarily a consequence of relief provided through the
bankruptcy process. Accounts payable and other current
liabilities provided the primary source of the cash flow
increase. This was due primarily to the non-payment of accounts
payable and other current liabilities owed at the time of our
bankruptcy filing, which were classified as Liabilities subject
to compromise. Accounts payable and other current liabilities at
December 31, 2006 subject to compromise approximated $503.
As such, had it not been for bankruptcy relief, working capital
cash flow would have included payment of these liabilities, and
cash flow from operating activities would have reflected a use
of approximately $451.
In 2005, working capital consumed cash of $171. Reductions of
receivables and inventories provided cash of $146 and $81. The
consumption of cash was primarily due to a decrease in accounts
payable of approximately $241. After announcing the reduction in
our earnings forecast for the second half of 2005 and the
decision to provide a valuation allowance against our
U.S. deferred tax assets, we accelerated payments to
certain key suppliers to insure that deliveries would not be
delayed. Additionally, 2005 cash flow included a payment to
settle prior-year tax returns, partially offset by the
reimbursement of claims by certain insurers.
Excluding the working capital change, operating activities used
cash of $135 in 2007, $147 in 2006 and $45 in 2005. Sales less
cost of sales and selling, general and administrative expenses
were a profit of $125 in 2007, and losses of $81 in 2006 and $94
in 2005. Although improved overall profitability, as measured on
this basis, benefited cash flow in 2007, operating cash was
required for bankruptcy reorganization costs which were $141,
exclusive of non-cash supplier and claim settlements and payment
of $71 of postretirement medical claims in excess of amounts
expensed. Operating cash flows in 2006 were also reduced by
bankruptcy reorganization costs which used cash of $91 in 2006.
43
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash from Investing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
$
|
(254
|
)
|
|
$
|
(314
|
)
|
|
$
|
(297
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of businesses
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of DCC assets and partnership interests
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
Proceeds from sale of other assets
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
Acquisition of business, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Payments received on leases and loans
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
Other
|
|
|
(18
|
)
|
|
|
34
|
|
|
|
(8
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
$
|
348
|
|
|
$
|
(86
|
)
|
|
$
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Divestitures of the engine hard parts, fluid products, pumps and
trailer axle businesses and the sale of our investment in GETRAG
provided cash of $414 in 2007. Proceeds from our continued
divestment of DCC assets generated additional proceeds in 2007
of $189. Expenditures for property, plant and equipment were
lower in 2007 than in 2006 and 2005 in part due to timing, the
redeployment of assets from closed facilities and some program
cancellations.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Cash from Financing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in short-term debt
|
|
$
|
(21
|
)
|
|
$
|
(551
|
)
|
|
$
|
492
|
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(205
|
)
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
Proceeds from
debtor-in-possession
facility
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from European securitization program
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction in DCC Medium Term Notes
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
$
|
166
|
|
|
$
|
(49
|
)
|
|
$
|
398
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2007, we borrowed an additional $200 under the DIP Credit
Agreement that was established in 2006 in connection with our
bankruptcy filing to meet our working capital and other cash
requirements. Proceeds of $700 were initially obtained in 2006
and used in part to repay obligations under a then existing bank
facility and an accounts receivable securitization program which
had been used as our primary short-term financing vehicles. The
borrowings in 2005 were primarily draws under these financing
arrangements.
Certain of our European subsidiaries established an accounts
receivable securitization facility during 2007 and at the end of
the year had outstanding borrowings of $119 under the facility.
In accordance with the terms of the forbearance agreement
discussed in Note 3 to our financial statements in
Item 8, proceeds from the sale of DCC assets in 2007 were
used to repay $132 of DCC Medium Term Notes. Pursuant to the
forbearance agreement with DCC noteholders, proceeds from the
sale of DCC assets were remitted to the noteholders at the
beginning of each month following the end of each calendar
quarter, resulting in the reduction in DCC term notes.
During 2005, we made draws under an accounts receivable
securitization program and a five-year revolving credit facility
to meet our working capital needs. We also refinanced a secured
note due in 2007 related to a DCC investment to a non-recourse
note due in August 2010 and increased the principal outstanding
from $40 to $55. The remainder of our debt transactions in 2005
was generally limited to $61 of debt repayments, including a $50
scheduled payment at DCC.
44
Financing
Activities
Cash and Cash
Equivalents
At December 31, 2007, cash and cash equivalents held in the
U.S. amounted to $513. Included in this amount was $71 of
cash deposits that provide credit enhancement for certain lease
agreements and support surety bonds that enable us to
self-insure our workers compensation obligations in
certain states and fund an escrow account required to appeal a
judgment rendered in Texas. Cash of $93 held by DCC at
December 31, 2007 had been restricted under the terms of a
forbearance agreement discussed in Note 3 to our financial
statements in Item 8 and was reported separately as
restricted cash.
At December 31, 2007, cash and cash equivalents held
outside the U.S. amounted to $758. Included in this amount
was $40 of cash deposits that provide credit enhancement for
certain lease agreements, letters of credit, bank guarantees and
support surety bonds that enable us to self-insure certain
employee benefit obligations. These deposits are not considered
restricted cash as they could have been replaced by letters of
credit under our DIP Credit Agreement. See Note 16 to our
financial statements in Item 8. Availability at
December 31, 2007 was adequate to cover the deposits for
which replacement by letters of credit is permitted.
Availability under the Exit Facility is also adequate to cover
these deposits.
A substantial portion of our
non-U.S. cash
and equivalents is needed for working capital and other
operating purposes. Several countries have local regulatory
requirements that significantly restrict Danas ability to
access this cash. In addition, at December 31, 2007, $88
was held by consolidated entities that have minority interests
with varying levels of participation rights involving cash
withdrawals. Beyond these restrictions, there are practical
limitations on repatriation of cash from certain countries
because of the resulting tax cost.
Intercompany
Loans
Certain of our international operations had intercompany loan
obligations to the U.S. totaling $444 at December 31,
2007. These intercompany loans resulted (i) from certain
international operations having received cash or other forms of
financial support from the U.S. to finance their
activities, (ii) from U.S. entities transferring their
ownership in certain entities in exchange for intercompany notes
and (iii) from certain entities having declared a dividend
in kind in the form of a note payable. Intercompany loans of
$240 are denominated in a foreign currency and are not
considered to be permanently invested as they are expected to be
repaid in the near term. Accordingly, foreign exchange gains and
losses on these loans are reported in other income (expense)
rather than being recorded in OCI as translation gain or loss.
Pre-petition
Financing
Before the Filing Date, we had a five-year bank facility
maturing on March 4, 2010, which provided $400 of borrowing
capacity, and an accounts receivable securitization program that
provided up to a maximum of $275 to meet our periodic needs for
short-term financing. Outstanding obligations under the bank
facility and the accounts receivable securitization facility
aggregating $400 at the Filing Date were paid with the proceeds
of the term loan under the DIP Credit Agreement and the proceeds
from an interim DIP credit facility. The obligations under the
accounts receivable securitization program facility were paid
with the proceeds of an interim DIP revolving credit facility.
The proceeds of the term loan under the DIP Credit Agreement
were used to pay off the borrowing under the interim DIP
revolving credit facility and the five-year bank facility.
DIP Credit
Agreement
We, as borrower, and our Debtor subsidiaries, as guarantors,
were parties to the DIP Credit Agreement that was initially
approved by the Bankruptcy Court in March 2006. Under the DIP
Credit Agreement, we had a $650 revolving credit facility and a
$900 term loan facility at December 31, 2007. All of the
loans and other obligations under the DIP Credit Agreement were
settled as part of the consummation of the Plan, primarily from
the funding obtained from the Exit Facility. Amounts borrowed at
December 31, 2007 were at a rate of 7.36%, the London
Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) plus 2.5%. We also paid a
commitment fee of 0.375% per
45
annum for unused committed amounts under the facility as well as
a fee for issued and undrawn letters of credit in an amount per
annum equal to the LIBOR margin applicable to the revolving
credit facility and a per annum fronting fee of 0.25%.
The DIP Credit Agreement was guaranteed by substantially all of
our domestic subsidiaries, except for DCC and its subsidiaries.
As collateral, we and each of our guarantor subsidiaries had
granted a security interest in, and lien on, effectively all of
our assets, including a pledge of 66% of the equity interests of
each material foreign subsidiary directly or indirectly owned by
us.
Additionally, the DIP Credit Agreement had required us to
(i) maintain a minimum amount of consolidated earnings
before interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization,
restructuring and reorganization costs (EBITDAR), for each
period beginning on March 1, 2006 and ending on the last
day of each month from May 2006 through February 2007, and
(ii) a rolling
12-month
cumulative EBITDAR for us and our direct and indirect
subsidiaries, on a consolidated basis, beginning on
March 31, 2007 and ending on February 28, 2008, at
levels set forth in the DIP Credit Agreement, as amended. We
were also required to maintain minimum availability of $100 at
all times. The DIP Credit Agreement provided for certain events
of default customary for
debtor-in-possession
financings of this type, including cross default with other
indebtedness. Upon the occurrence and during the continuance of
any event of default under the DIP Credit Agreement, interest on
all outstanding amounts would be payable on demand at 2% above
the then applicable rate. We were in compliance with the
requirements of the DIP Credit Agreement at December 31,
2007.
As of December 31, 2007, we had borrowed $900 under the DIP
Credit Agreement and based on our borrowing base collateral, had
additional availability of $282 after deducting the $100 minimum
availability requirement and $206 for outstanding letters of
credit. Letters of credit issued under the DIP Credit Agreement
were transferred to the Exit Facility.
Financing at
Emergence
On the Effective Date, Dana, as Borrower, and certain of our
domestic subsidiaries, as guarantors, entered into the Exit
Facility with Citicorp USA, Inc., Lehman Brothers Inc. and
Barclays Capital. The Exit Facility consists of the Term
Facility in the total aggregate amount of $1,430 and the $650
Revolving Facility. The Term Facility was fully drawn in
borrowings of $1,350 on the Effective Date and $80 on
February 1, 2008. Net proceeds were reduced by payment of
$114 of original issue discount and customary issuance costs and
fees of $40 for net proceeds of $1,276. There were no borrowings
under the Revolving Facility, but $200 was utilized for existing
letters of credit.
Amounts outstanding under the Revolving Facility may be
borrowed, repaid and reborrowed with the final payment due and
payable on January 31, 2013. Amounts outstanding under the
Term Facility are payable in equal quarterly amounts on the last
day of each fiscal quarter at a rate of 1% per annum of the
original principal amount of the Term Facility advances,
adjusted for any prepayments, prior to January 31, 2014,
with the remaining balance due in equal quarterly installments
in the final year of the Term Facility and final maturity on
January 31, 2015.
The Exit Facility contains mandatory prepayment requirements in
certain circumstances upon the sale of assets, insurance
recoveries, the incurrence of debt, the issuance of equity
securities and on the basis of excess cash flow as defined in
the agreement, subject to certain permitted reinvestment rights,
in addition to the ability to make optional prepayments. Certain
term loan prepayments are subject to a prepayment call premium
prior to the second anniversary of the Term Facility.
The Revolving Facility bears interest at a floating rate based
on, at our option, the base rate or LIBOR rate (each as
described in the Revolving Facility) plus a margin based on the
undrawn amounts available under the Revolving Facility set forth
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining Borrowing Availability
|
|
Base Rate
|
|
|
LIBOR Rate
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater than $450
|
|
|
1.00
|
%
|
|
|
2.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Greater than $200 but less than or equal to $450
|
|
|
1.25
|
%
|
|
|
2.25
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$200 or less
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
2.50
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
46
We will pay a commitment fee of 0.375% per annum for unused
committed amounts under the Revolving Facility. Up to $400 of
the Revolving Facility may be applied to letters of credit.
Issued letters of credit reduce availability. We will pay a fee
for issued and undrawn letters of credit in an amount per annum
equal to the applicable LIBOR margin based on a quarterly
average availability under the Revolving Facility and a per
annum fronting fee of 0.25%, payable quarterly.
The Term Facility bears interest at a floating rate based on, at
our option, the base rate or LIBOR rate (each as described in
the Term Facility) plus a margin of 2.75% in the case of base
rate loans or 3.75% in the case of LIBOR rate loans.
For the first 24 months following the Effective Date, the
LIBOR rates in each of the Revolving Facility and the Term
Facility will not be less than 3.00%. Interest is due quarterly
in arrears with respect to base rate loans and at the end of
each interest period with respect to LIBOR loans. For LIBOR
loans with interest periods greater than 90 days, interest
is payable every 90 days from the first day of such
interest period and on the date such loan is converted or paid
in full.
Under the Exit Facility, Dana (with certain subsidiaries
excluded) is required to comply with customary covenants for
facilities of this type. These include (i) affirmative
covenants as to corporate existence, compliance with laws,
making after-acquired property or subsidiaries subject to the
liens of the lenders, environmental matters, insurance, payment
of taxes, access to books and records, using commercially
reasonable efforts to maintain credit ratings, use of proceeds,
maintenance of cash management systems, priority of liens in
favor of the lenders, maintenance of assets, interest rate
protection and quarterly, annual and other reporting
obligations, and (ii) negative covenants, including
limitations on liens, additional indebtedness, guarantees,
dividends, transactions with affiliates, investments, asset
dispositions, nature of business, capital expenditures, mergers
and consolidations, amendments to constituent documents,
accounting changes, and limitations on restrictions affecting
subsidiaries and sale and lease-backs.
Under the Term Facility, we are required to maintain compliance
with the following financial covenants measured on the last day
of each fiscal quarter:
(i) commencing as of December 31, 2008, a maximum
leverage ratio of not greater than 3.10 to 1.00 at
December 31, 2008, decreasing in steps to 2.25 to 1.00 as
of June 30, 2013, based on the ratio of consolidated funded
debt to the previous 12 month consolidated earnings before
interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization (EBITDA), as
defined in the agreement;
(ii) commencing as of December 31, 2008, minimum
interest coverage ratio of not less than 4.50 to 1.00 based on
the previous
12-month
consolidated EBITDA to consolidated interest expense for that
period, as defined in the agreement; and
(iii) a minimum EBITDA of $211 for the six months ending
June 30, 2008 and of $341 for the nine months ending
September 30, 2008.
The Revolving Facility requires us to comply with a minimum
fixed charge coverage ratio of not less than 1.10 to 1.00,
measured quarterly, in the event availability under the
Revolving Facility falls below $75 for five consecutive business
days. The ratio is the last 12 months EBITDA less
unfinanced capital expenditures divided by the sum of interest,
scheduled principal payments, taxes and dividends paid for the
last 12 months.
The Exit Facility includes customary events of default for
facilities of this type, including failure to pay principal,
interest or other amounts when due, breach of representations
and warranties, breach of any covenant under the Exit Facility,
cross-default to other indebtedness, judgment default,
invalidity of any loan document, failure of liens to be
perfected, the occurrence of certain Employee Retirement Income
Security Act events or the occurrence of a change of control.
Upon the occurrence and continuance of an event of default, our
lenders may have the right, among other things, to terminate
their commitments under the Exit Facility, accelerate the
repayment of all of our obligations under the Exit Facility and
foreclose on the collateral granted to them.
The Exit Facility is guaranteed by all of our domestic
subsidiaries except DCC, Dana Companies, LLC and their
respective subsidiaries. As of the Effective Date, Dana and the
guarantors entered into the Revolving
47
Facility Security Agreement and the Term Facility Security
Agreement. The Revolving Facility Security Agreement grants a
first priority lien on Dana and the guarantors accounts
receivable and inventory and a second priority lien on
substantially all of Dana and the guarantors remaining
assets, including a pledge of 65% of the stock of each foreign
subsidiary we own. The Term Facility Security Agreement grants a
second priority lien on accounts receivable and inventory and a
first priority lien on substantially all of Dana and the
guarantors remaining assets, including a pledge of 65% of
the stock of each foreign subsidiary we own.
In connection with the Exit Facility, as of the Effective Date
we also entered into the Intercreditor Agreement, which
establishes the relationship between the security agreements
described above.
A portion of the net proceeds from the Exit Facility were used
to repay the DIP Credit Agreement (which was terminated pursuant
to its terms), make other payments required upon exit from
bankruptcy protection and provide liquidity to fund working
capital and other general corporate purposes.
The Revolving Facility received a rating of BB+ from
Standard & Poors and Ba2 from Moodys
Investment Services. The Term Facility received a rating of BB
from Standard & Poors and Ba3 from Moodys
Investment Services.
European
Receivables Loan Facility
In July 2007, certain of our European subsidiaries entered into
definitive agreements to establish an accounts receivable
securitization program. The agreements include a Receivable Loan
Agreement (the Loan Agreement) with GE Leveraged Loans Limited
(GE) that provides for a five-year accounts receivable
securitization facility under which up to the euro equivalent of
$225 in financing is available to those European subsidiaries
(collectively, the Sellers) subject to the availability of an
adequate level of accounts receivable.
Ancillary to the Loan Agreement, the Sellers entered into
receivables purchase agreements and related agreements, as
applicable, under which they, directly or indirectly, sell
certain accounts receivable to Dana Europe Financing (Ireland)
Limited, (the Purchaser). The Purchaser is a limited liability
company incorporated under the laws of Ireland as a special
purpose entity to purchase the identified accounts receivable.
The Purchaser pays the purchase price of the identified accounts
receivable in part from the proceeds of loans from GE and other
lenders under the Loan Agreement and in part from the proceeds
of certain subordinated loans from our subsidiary Dana Europe
S.A. The Purchasers obligations under the Loan Agreement
are secured by a lien on and security interest in all of its
rights to the transferred accounts receivable, as well as
collection accounts and items related to the accounts
receivable. The accounts receivable purchased are included in
our consolidated financial statements because the Purchaser does
not meet certain accounting requirements for treatment as a
qualifying special purpose entity under GAAP.
Accordingly, the sales of the accounts receivable and
subordinated loans from Dana Europe S.A. are eliminated in
consolidation and any loans to the Purchaser from GE and the
participating lenders are included in our consolidated financial
statements. The securitization program is accounted for as a
secured borrowing with a pledge of collateral. At
December 31, 2007, the total amount of accounts receivable
serving as collateral securing the borrowing was $351.
Advances to the Purchaser under the Loan Agreement are
determined based on advance rates relating to the value of the
transferred accounts receivable. Advances bear interest based on
the LIBOR applicable to the currency in which each advance is
denominated, plus a margin as specified in the Loan Agreement.
Advances are to be repaid in full by July 2012. The Purchaser
pays a fee to the lenders based on any unused amount of the
accounts receivable facility. The Loan Agreement contains
representations and warranties, affirmative and negative
covenants and events of default that are customary for
financings of this type.
The Sellers and our subsidiary Dana International Luxembourg
SARL, (Dana Luxembourg) and certain of its subsidiaries
(collectively, the Dana European Group) also entered into a
Performance and Indemnity Deed (the Performance Guaranty) with
GE under which Dana Luxembourg has, among other things,
guaranteed the Sellers obligations to perform under their
respective purchase agreements. The Performance Guaranty
contains representations and warranties, affirmative and
negative covenants, and events of default that are customary for
financings of this type, including certain restrictions on the
ability of members of the Dana
48
European Group to incur additional indebtedness, grant liens on
their assets, make acquisitions and investments, and pay
dividends and make other distributions. Dana Luxembourg has
agreed to act as the master servicer for the transferred
accounts receivable under the terms of a servicing agreement
with GE and each Seller has agreed to act as a sub-servicer
under the servicing agreement for the transferred accounts
receivable it sells.
At December 31, 2007, there was additional availability of
$33 in countries that have started securitization and there were
borrowings under this facility equivalent to $119 recorded as
notes payable. The proceeds from the borrowings were used for
operations and the repayment of intercompany debt.
Canadian Credit
Agreement
Dana Canada and certain of its Canadian affiliates were parties
to a Canadian Credit Agreement. The Canadian Credit Agreement
provided for a $100 revolving credit facility, of which $5 was
available for the issuance of letters of credit. At
December 31, 2007, less than $1 of the facility was being
utilized for letters of credit and there had been no borrowings
over the life of the agreement. Based on its borrowing base
collateral at December 31, 2007, Dana Canada had additional
availability of $52 after deducting the $20 minimum availability
requirement. The Canadian Credit Agreement was terminated upon
our emergence from bankruptcy.
Debt
Reclassification
The bankruptcy filing triggered the immediate acceleration of
our direct financial obligations (including, among others,
outstanding non-secured notes issued under our Indentures dated
as of December 15, 1997, August 8, 2001,
March 11, 2002 and December 10, 2004) and
DCCs obligations under the DCC Notes. The amounts
accelerated under the Indentures were characterized as unsecured
debt for purposes of the reorganization proceedings. Obligations
of $1,582 under our indentures were classified as Liabilities
subject to compromise, and the unsecured DCC notes have been
classified as part of the current portion of long-term debt in
our consolidated balance sheet.
DCC
Notes
At December 31, 2007, DCC held $136 of debt, classified as
short term, under a $500 Medium Term Note Program established in
1999. The DCC Notes were general unsecured obligations of DCC.
In January 2008, DCC repaid $87 of this debt pursuant to the
forbearance agreement with the noteholders. On the Effective
Date, we paid DCC the $49 remaining amount due to DCC
noteholders, thereby settling DCCs general unsecured claim
of $325 with the Debtors. DCC, in turn, used these funds to
repay the noteholders in full.
Interest Rate
Agreements
Under the terms of the Exit Facility, we are required to enter
into interest rate hedge agreements by May 30, 2008 and to
maintain agreements covering a notional amount of not less than
50% of the aggregate loans outstanding under the Term Facility
for a period of no less than three years.
At the Filing Date, we had two interest rate swap agreements
scheduled to expire in August 2011, under which we had agreed to
exchange the difference between fixed rate and floating rate
interest amounts on notional amounts corresponding with the
amount and term of our August 2011 notes. As of
December 31, 2005, the interest rate swap agreements
provided for us to receive a fixed rate of 9.0% on a notional
amount of $114 and pay variable rates based on LIBOR, plus a
spread. The average variable rate under these contracts
approximated 9.4% at the end of 2005. As a result of our
bankruptcy filing, the two swap agreements were terminated,
resulting in a termination payment of $6 on March 30, 2006.
49
Issuance of New
Common and Preferred Stock
New Common
Stock
Pursuant to the Plan, all of the issued and outstanding shares
of Prior Dana common stock, par value $1.00 per share, and any
other outstanding equity securities of Prior Dana, including all
options and warrants, were cancelled. On the Effective Date, we
began the process of issuing 100 million shares of Dana
common stock, par value $0.01 per share, including approximately
70 million shares for allowed unsecured nonpriority claims,
approximately 28 million shares deposited to a reserve for
disputed unsecured nonpriority claims in Class 5B under the
Plan, approximately 1 million shares for payment of
post-emergence bonuses to union employees and approximately
1 million shares to pay bonuses to non-union hourly and
salaried non-management employees. The charges to earnings for
these bonuses were recorded as of the Effective Date.
New Preferred
Stock
Pursuant to the Plan, we issued 2,500,000 shares of 4.0%
Series A Preferred and 5,400,000 shares of 4.0%
Series B Preferred on the Effective Date. After
July 31, 2008, and in accordance with the terms of the
preferred stock, the shares of Series B Preferred, and not
more than $125 of liquidation value of the Series A
Preferred, are, at the holders option, convertible into
fully paid and non-assessable shares of common stock. The
remaining shares of Series A Preferred are convertible
after January 31, 2011. See description of preferred stock
in Item 1 and Note 11 to the financial statements in
Item 8 for additional information, including
Centerbridges participation in the selection of our Board
of Directors and limited approval rights with respect to certain
transactions.
Cash
Obligations
We are obligated to make future cash payments in fixed amounts
under various agreements. These include payments under our
long-term debt agreements, rent payments required under
operating lease agreements and payments for equipment, other
fixed assets and certain raw materials.
The following table summarizes our fixed cash obligations at
December 31, 2007 to make future payments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than
|
|
|
1-3
|
|
|
4-5
|
|
|
After
|
|
Contractual Cash Obligations
|
|
Total
|
|
|
1 Year
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
Years
|
|
|
5 Years
|
|
|
Principal of long-term debt (1)
|
|
$
|
1,062
|
|
|
$
|
1,043
|
|
|
$
|
11
|
|
|
$
|
6
|
|
|
$
|
2
|
|
Liabilities subject to compromise to be paid in cash, including
VEBA fundings (2)
|
|
|
1,012
|
|
|
|
1,012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest payments (3)
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Leases (4)
|
|
|
380
|
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
101
|
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
145
|
|
Unconditional purchase obligations (5)
|
|
|
175
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension plan contributions (6)
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retiree healthcare benefits (7)
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
43
|
|
Uncertain income tax positions (8)
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual cash obligations
|
|
$
|
2,768
|
|
|
$
|
2,326
|
|
|
$
|
159
|
|
|
$
|
93
|
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes:
|
|
|
(1) |
|
The obligation to repay principal of long-term debt includes the
required repayment of the DIP Credit Agreement balance of $900
upon emergence. The principal and interest related to our Exit
Financing discussed above under Liquidity are not
included in this table. |
|
(2) |
|
Cash payments resulting from the bankruptcy proceedings. A
portion of these payments were made at emergence and the
remainder is expected to be paid in 2008. The remainder of our
Liabilities subject to |
50
|
|
|
|
|
compromise was resolved upon emergence through the issuance of
common stock of Dana or through the retention of the liability
to be paid in the normal course of business. |
|
(3) |
|
These amounts represent future interest payments based on the
debt balances at December 31. Payments related to variable
rate debt are based on the December 31, 2007 interest
rates. Interest on Exit Financing debt is not included. |
|
(4) |
|
Capital and operating leases related to real estate, vehicles
and other assets. |
|
(5) |
|
The unconditional purchase obligations presented are comprised
principally of commitments for procurement of fixed assets and
the purchase of raw materials. Also included are payments under
our long-term agreement with IBM for the outsourcing of certain
human resource services. |
|
|
|
We have a number of sourcing arrangements with suppliers for
various component parts used in the assembly of certain of our
products. These arrangements include agreements to procure
certain outsourced components that we had manufactured ourselves
in earlier years. These agreements do not contain any specific
minimum quantities that we must order in any given year, but
generally require that we purchase the specific component
exclusively from the supplier over the term of the agreement.
Accordingly, our cash obligation under these agreements is not
fixed. However, if we were to estimate volumes to be purchased
under these agreements based on our forecasts for 2008 and
assume that the volumes were constant over the respective
contract periods, the annual purchases from those agreements
where we estimate the annual volume would exceed $20 would be as
follows: $395 in 2008; $773 in 2009 and 2010 combined; $709 in
2011 and 2012 combined; and $788 thereafter. |
|
(6) |
|
These amounts represent estimated 2008 contributions to our
global defined benefit pension plans. We have not estimated
pension contributions beyond 2008 due to the significant impact
that return on plan assets and changes in discount rates might
have on such amounts. |
|
(7) |
|
These amounts represent estimated obligations under our
non-U.S.
retiree healthcare programs. Obligations under the retiree
healthcare programs are not fixed commitments and will vary
depending on various factors, including the level of participant
utilization and inflation. Our estimates of the payments to be
made in the future consider recent payment trends and certain or
our actuarial assumptions. |
|
(8) |
|
These amounts represent expected payments, with interest, for
uncertain tax positions as of December 31, 2007. We were
unable to reasonably estimate the timing of the FIN 48
liability in individual years beyond 2008 due to uncertainties
in the timing of the effective settlement of tax positions. |
Pursuant to the Plan, we also issued 2,500,000 shares of
4.0% Series A Preferred and 5,400,000 shares of 4.0%
Series B Preferred. Dividend obligations of approximately
$8 per quarter will be incurred while all shares of preferred
stock are outstanding.
At December 31, 2007, we maintained cash balances of $111
on deposit with financial institutions to support surety bonds,
letters of credit and bank guarantees, and to provide credit
enhancements for certain lease agreements. These surety bonds
enable us to self-insure our workers compensation obligations.
We accrue the estimated liability for workers compensation
claims, including incurred but not reported claims. Accordingly,
no significant impact on our financial condition would result if
the surety bonds were called.
In connection with certain of our divestitures, there may be
future claims and proceedings instituted or asserted against us
relative to the period of our ownership or pursuant to
indemnifications or guarantees provided in connection with the
respective transactions. The estimated maximum potential amount
of payments under these obligations is not determinable due to
the significant number of divestitures and lack of a stated
maximum liability for certain matters. In some cases, we have
insurance coverage available to satisfy claims related to the
divested businesses. We believe that payments, if any, in excess
of amounts provided or insured related to such matters are not
reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on our
liquidity, financial condition or results of operations.
51
Contingencies
Impact of Our
Bankruptcy Filing
During our bankruptcy reorganization proceedings, most actions
against us relating to pre-petition liabilities were
automatically stayed. Substantially all of our pre-petition
liabilities were addressed under the Plan. Our emergence from
bankruptcy resolved certain of our contingencies as discussed
below.
The Bankruptcy Court confirmed the Plan on December 26,
2007. On January 3, 2008, an Ad Hoc Committee of Asbestos
Personal Injury Claimants filed a notice of appeal of the
Confirmation Order (District Court Case
No. 08-CV-01037).
On January 4, 2008, an asbestos claimant, Jose Angel
Valdez, filed a notice of appeal of the Confirmation Order
(District Court Case
No. 08-CV-01038).
On February 5, 2008, Prior Dana and the other
post-emergence Debtors (collectively, the Reorganized
Debtors) filed a motion seeking to consolidate the two
appeals. Briefing is ongoing in these appeals, and the
Reorganized Debtors are moving to have the appeals dismissed.
Class Action
Lawsuit and Derivative Actions
A securities class action entitled Howard Frank v. Michael J.
Burns and Robert C. Richter was originally filed in October
2005 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Ohio, naming our former Chief Executive Officer, Michael J.
Burns, and former Chief Financial Officer, Robert C. Richter, as
defendants. In a consolidated complaint filed in August 2006,
lead plaintiffs alleged violations of the U.S. securities
laws and claimed that the price at which our stock traded at
various times between April 2004 and October 2005 was
artificially inflated as a result of the defendants
alleged wrongdoing. In June 2007, the District Court denied lead
plaintiffs motion for an order partially lifting the
statutory discovery stay which would have enabled them to obtain
copies of certain documents produced to the SEC. By order dated
August 21, 2007, the District Court granted the
defendants motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint
and entered a judgment closing the case. In September 2007, lead
plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal from the District
Courts order and judgment and, in February 2008, they
filed their opening brief in the United States Court of Appeals
for the Sixth Circuit.
A stockholder derivative action entitled Roberta
Casden v. Michael J. Burns, et al. was originally filed
in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of
Ohio in March 2006. An amended complaint filed in August 2006
added alleged non-derivative class claims on behalf of holders
of our stock alleging, among other things, that the defendants,
our former Board of Directors and former Chief Financial Officer
had breached their fiduciary duties and acted in bad faith in
determining to file for protection under the Bankruptcy Laws.
These alleged non-derivative class claims are not asserted
against Dana. In June 2006, the District Court stayed the
derivative claims, deferring to the Bankruptcy Court on those
claims. In July 2007, the District Court dismissed the
non-derivative class claims asserted in the amended complaint
and entered a judgment closing the case. In August 2007,
plaintiff filed a notice of appeal from the District
Courts order and judgment. In February 2008, the plaintiff
filed an opening brief in the United States Court of Appeals for
the Sixth Circuit. A second stockholder derivative action,
Steven Staehr v. Michael J. Burns, et al., remains
stayed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District
of Ohio.
SEC
Investigation
In September 2005, we reported that management was investigating
accounting matters arising out of incorrect entries related to a
customer agreement in our Commercial Vehicle operations, and
that the Prior Dana Audit Committee had engaged outside counsel
to conduct an independent investigation of these matters, as
well. Outside counsel informed the SEC of the investigation,
which ended in December 2005, at which time we filed restated
financial statements for the first two quarters of 2005 and the
years 2002 through 2004. In January 2006, we learned that the
SEC had issued a formal order of investigation with respect to
matters related to our restatements. The SECs
investigation is a non-public, fact-finding inquiry to determine
whether any violations of the law have occurred. We are
continuing to cooperate fully with the SEC in the investigation.
52
Legal Proceedings
Arising in the Ordinary Course of Business
We are a party to various pending judicial and administrative
proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. These
include, among others, proceedings based on product liability
claims and alleged violations of environmental laws. We have
reviewed these pending legal proceedings, including the probable
outcomes, our reasonably anticipated costs and expenses, the
availability and limits of our insurance coverage and surety
bonds and our established reserves for uninsured liabilities. We
do not believe that any liabilities that may result from these
proceedings are reasonably likely to have a material adverse
effect on our liquidity, financial condition or results of
operations.
Asbestos Personal
Injury Liabilities
We had approximately 41,000 active pending asbestos personal
injury liability claims at December 31, 2007 compared to
73,000 at December 31, 2006, including approximately 6,000
claims that were settled but awaiting final documentation and
payment. The number of active pending claims has been reduced
for two reasons. First, the dismissal of approximately 17,500
cases in the State of Mississippi reported in the third quarter
of 2007. Second, updates of our data on asbestos claims during
the bankruptcy process disclosed that approximately 13,000
additional claims were inactive. These claims were filed in
jurisdictions with inactive dockets or medical criteria that
renders them unlikely to become active. We project costs for
asbestos personal injury claims using the methodology that is
discussed in Note 18 to the financial statements in
Item 8. We had accrued $136 for indemnity and defense costs
for pending and future claims at December 31, 2007,
compared to $141 at December 31, 2006.
Prior to 2006, we reached agreements with some of our insurers
to commute policies covering asbestos personal injury claims. We
apply proceeds from insurance commutations first to reduce any
recorded recoverable amount. Proceeds from commutations in
excess of our estimated recoverable amount for pending and
future claims are recorded as a liability for future claims.
There were no commutations of insurance in 2007. At
December 31, 2007, our liability for future demands under
prior commutations was $12, bringing our total recorded
liability for asbestos personal injury claims to $148.
At December 31, 2007, we had recorded $69 as an asset for
probable recovery from our insurers for pending and projected
asbestos personal injury claims compared to $72 recorded at
December 31, 2006. The recorded asset reflects our
assessment of the capacity of our current insurance agreements
to provide for the payment of anticipated defense and indemnity
costs for pending claims and projected future demands. These
recoveries take into account elections to extend existing
coverage which we would exercise in order to maximize our
insurance recovery. The recorded asset does not represent the
limits of our insurance coverage, but rather the amount we would
expect to recover if we paid the accrued indemnity and defense
costs.
In addition, we had a net amount receivable from our insurers
and others of $17 at December 31, 2007, compared to $14 at
December 31, 2006. The receivable represents reimbursements
for settled asbestos personal injury liability claims, including
billings in progress and amounts subject to alternate dispute
resolution proceedings with some of our insurers. It is
anticipated that a favorable settlement to these proceedings
will be finalized soon.
As part of our reorganization, assets and liabilities associated
with asbestos claims were retained in Prior Dana, which was then
merged into Dana Companies, LLC, a consolidated wholly owned
subsidiary of Dana. The assets of Dana Companies, LLC include
insurance rights relating to coverage against these liabilities
and other assets which we believe are sufficient to satisfy its
liabilities. Dana Companies, LLC will continue to process
asbestos personal injury claims in the normal course of
business, but it will be separately managed and will have an
independent board member. The independent board member is
required to approve certain transactions including dividends or
other transfers of $1 or more of value to Dana. We expect our
involvement with Dana Companies, LLC will be limited to service
agreements for certain administrative activities.
53
Other Product
Liabilities
We had accrued $4 for non-asbestos product liabilities at
December 31, 2007, compared to $7 at December 31,
2006, with no recovery expected from third parties. We estimate
these liabilities based on assumptions about the value of the
claims and about the likelihood of recoveries against us derived
from our historical experience and current information.
Environmental
Liabilities
We had accrued $180 for environmental liabilities at
December 31, 2007, compared to $64 at December 31,
2006. We estimate these liabilities based on the most probable
method of remediation, current laws and regulations and existing
technology. Estimates are made on an undiscounted basis and
exclude the effects of inflation. In addition, expected claims
settlements have also been considered, as discussed below. If
there is a range of equally probable remediation methods or
outcomes, we accrue the lower end of the range.
Of the $180 accrued, $19 will be retained and continues as a
post-emergence obligation. The remaining $161 is being addressed
through the unresolved claims process described in the Emergence
from Reorganization Proceedings section of Item 1. As such,
the resolution of these matters will not have an impact on our
post-emergence financial condition or results of operations.
Among the larger unresolved claims at emergence was a claim
involving the Hamilton Avenue Industrial Park (Hamilton) site in
New Jersey. We are a potentially responsible party at this site
(also known as the Cornell Dubilier Electronics or CDE site)
under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (CERCLA). This matter has been the subject of an
estimation proceeding as a result of our objection to a claim
filed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and
other federal agencies (collectively, the Government) in
connection with this and several other CERCLA sites. During the
course of the proceedings and our efforts to address the
Governments claim, no additional information was provided
to support any adjustment to the amounts we had accrued for this
matter. For the past several months, we have been actively
litigating the claim and negotiating a settlement with the
Government on the Hamilton site as well as other environmental
claims. As a result of the continued negotiations, in February
2008 we concluded that there was a probable settlement outcome
involving the Hamilton site and other unresolved environmental
claims. The $180 accrued at December 31, 2007 includes a
provision of $119 to adjust the amounts accrued to the probable
settlement outcome.
As described in Note 3 to our financial statements in
Item 8, settlements of environmental claims and other
matters involving significant estimation could occur at amounts
significantly higher than the estimated accrued liabilities. In
the case of the settlement relating to the Hamilton site and
other environmental claims discussed above, uncertainties
regarding the levels of contamination, uncertainty of whether
there would be an equitable allocation of the claims to all
parties and the possibility of extended and costly litigation,
were all factors we considered in connection with the expected
settlement outcome. These same factors also precluded us, in the
absence of a consensual settlement, from previously determining
a probable and estimable liability beyond that which had been
previously accrued.
Other Liabilities
Related to Asbestos Claims
After the Center for Claims Resolution (CCR) discontinued
negotiating shared settlements for asbestos claims for its
member companies in 2001, some former CCR members defaulted on
the payment of their shares of some settlements and some
settling claimants sought payment of the unpaid shares from
other members of the CCR at the time of the settlements,
including from us. We have been working with the CCR, other
former CCR members, our insurers and the claimants over a period
of several years in an effort to resolve these issues. Through
December 31, 2007, we had paid $47 to claimants and
collected $29 from our insurance carriers with respect to these
claims. At December 31, 2007, we had a receivable of $18
that we expect to recover from available insurance and surety
bonds relating to these claims. We are continuing to pursue
insurance collections with respect to claims paid prior to the
Filing Date.
54
Critical
Accounting Estimates
The preparation of our consolidated financial statements in
conformity with GAAP requires us to make estimates and
assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and
liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities
at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the
reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting
period. Considerable judgment is often involved in making these
determinations. Critical estimates are those that require the
most difficult, subjective or complex judgments in the
preparation of the financial statements and the accompanying
notes. We evaluate these estimates and judgments on a regular
basis. We believe our assumptions and estimates are reasonable
and appropriate. However, the use of different assumptions could
result in significantly different results and actual results
could differ from those estimates. The following discussion of
accounting estimates is intended to supplement the Summary of
Significant Accounting Policies presented as Note 2 to the
financial statements in Item 8.
Income
Taxes
Accounting for income taxes is complex, in part, because we
conduct business globally and therefore file income tax returns
in numerous tax jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required
in determining the income tax provision, deferred tax assets and
liabilities and the valuation allowance recorded against our net
deferred tax assets. In assessing the recoverability of deferred
tax assets, we consider whether it is more likely than not that
some or a portion of the deferred tax assets will not be
realized. A valuation allowance is provided when, in our
judgment, based upon available information, it is more likely
than not that a portion of such deferred tax assets will not be
realized. We consider the projected future taxable income in
different tax jurisdictions and tax planning strategies in
making this assessment. We recorded a valuation allowance
against our U.S. deferred tax assets and U.S. and
foreign operating and other loss carryforwards for which
utilization is uncertain. Since future financial results may
differ from previous estimates, periodic adjustments to our
valuation allowance may be necessary.
In the ordinary course of business, there are many transactions
and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is less
than certain. We are regularly under audit by the various
applicable tax authorities. Although the outcome of tax audits
is always uncertain, we believe that we have appropriate support
for the positions taken on our tax returns and that our annual
tax provisions include amounts sufficient to pay assessments, if
any, which may be proposed by the taxing authorities.
Nonetheless, the amounts ultimately paid, if any, upon
resolution of the issues raised by the taxing authorities may
differ materially from the amounts accrued for each year.
See additional discussion of our deferred tax assets and
liabilities in Note 20 to the financial statements in
Item 8.
Retiree
Benefits
Accounting for pensions and OPEB involves estimating the cost of
benefits to be provided well into the future and attributing
that cost over the time period each employee works. These plan
expenses and obligations are dependent on assumptions developed
by us in consultation with our outside advisors such as
actuaries and other consultants and are generally calculated
independently of funding requirements. The assumptions used,
including inflation, discount rates, investment returns, life
expectancies, turnover, retirement rates, future compensation
levels, and health care cost trend rates, have a significant
impact on plan expenses and obligations. These assumptions are
regularly reviewed and modified when appropriate based on
historical experience, current trends and the future outlook.
Changes in one or more of the underlying assumptions could
result in a material impact to our consolidated financial
statements in any given period. If actual experience differs
from expectations, our financial position and results of
operations in future periods could be affected.
Certain changes to our U.S. postretirement benefit plans
were implemented during the bankruptcy process, with those
related to union employees becoming effective upon emergence.
Our postretirement healthcare obligations for all
U.S. employees and retirees have been eliminated. With
regard to pension benefits, credited service and benefit
accruals have been frozen for all U.S. employees in defined
benefit
55
plans. These initiatives have eliminated our U.S. OPEB
costs and, after considering our VEBA contributions, eliminated
the related funding requirements and reduced our future
U.S. pension requirements.
The inflation assumption is based on an evaluation of external
market indicators. Retirement, turnover and mortality rates are
based primarily on actual plan experience. Health care cost
trend rates are developed based on our actual historical claims
experience, the near-term outlook and an assessment of likely
long-term trends. For our largest plans, discount rates are
based upon the construction of a theoretical bond portfolio,
adjusted according to the timing of expected cash flows for the
future obligations. A yield curve was developed based on a
subset of these high-quality fixed-income investments (those
with yields between the
40th and
90th percentiles).
The projected cash flows were matched to this yield curve and a
present value developed, which was then calibrated to develop a
single equivalent discount rate. Pension benefits are funded
through deposits with trustees that satisfy, at a minimum, the
applicable funding regulations. For our largest defined benefit
pension plans, expected investment rates of return are based
upon input from the plans investment advisors and actuary
regarding our current investment portfolio mix, historical rates
of return on those assets, projected future asset class returns,
the impact of active management and long-term market conditions
and inflation expectations. We believe that the long-term asset
allocation on average will approximate the targeted allocation
and we regularly review the actual asset allocation to
periodically rebalance the investments to the targeted
allocation when appropriate. Aside from contributions made to
VEBAs as part of settlement agreements in 2007, OPEB benefits
are funded as they become due.
Actuarial gains or losses may result from changes in assumptions
or when actual experience is different from that expected. Under
the applicable standards, those gains and losses are not
required to be immediately recognized as expense, but instead
may be deferred as part of accumulated other comprehensive
income and amortized into expense over future periods.
A change in the pension discount rate of 25 basis points
would result in a change in our U.S. pension obligations of
approximately $47 and a change in U.S. pension expense of
approximately $3. A 25 basis point change in the rate of
return would change U.S. pension expense by approximately
$4.
Restructuring actions involving facility closures and employee
downsizing and divestitures frequently give rise to adjustments
to employee benefit plan obligations, including the recognition
of curtailment or settlement gains and losses. Upon the
occurrence of these events, the obligations of the employee
benefit plans affected by the action are also re-measured based
on updated assumptions as of the re-measurement date.
See additional discussion of our pension and OPEB obligations in
Note 14 to the financial statements in Item 8.
Long-lived Asset
Impairment
We perform periodic impairment analyses on our long-lived assets
whenever events and circumstances indicate that the carrying
amount of such assets may not be recoverable. When indications
are present, we compare the estimated future undiscounted net
cash flows of the operations to which the assets relate to their
carrying amount. If the operations are determined to be unable
to recover the carrying amount of their assets, the long-lived
assets are written down to their estimated fair value. Fair
value is determined based on discounted cash flows, third party
appraisals or other methods that provide appropriate estimates
of value.
Asset impairments often result from significant actions like the
discontinuance of customer programs and facility closures. In
the Business Strategy section, we discuss a number
of reorganization initiatives that are completed or in process,
which include customer program evaluations and manufacturing
footprint assessments. We have recognized asset impairments
associated with these actions. Future decisions in connection
with these actions or new actions could result in additional
asset impairment losses in the future.
Goodwill
We test goodwill for impairment as of December 31 of each year
for all of our reporting units, or more frequently if events
occur or circumstances change that would warrant such a review.
We make significant assumptions and estimates about the extent
and timing of future cash flows, growth rates and discount
rates.
56
The cash flows are estimated over a significant future period of
time, which makes those estimates and assumptions subject to a
high degree of uncertainty. We also utilize market valuation
models which require us to make certain assumptions and
estimates regarding the applicability of those models to our
assets and businesses. We believe that the assumptions and
estimates used to determine the estimated fair values of each of
our reporting units are reasonable. However, different
assumptions could materially affect the results. As described in
Note 9 to the financials statements in Item 8, we
recorded goodwill impairment of $89 in 2007 related to our
Thermal business segment.
Liabilities
Subject to Compromise
Pre-petition obligations relating to matters such as contract
disputes, litigation and environmental remediation were
evaluated to determine whether a potential liability is
probable. If probable, an assessment, based on all information
then available, is made of whether the potential liability is
estimable. A liability is recorded when it is both probable and
estimable. In a case where there is a range of estimates which
are equally probable, a liability is generally recorded using
the low end of the range of estimates. In connection with our
emergence from bankruptcy, substantially all claims relating to
pre-petition matters are being satisfied and discharged under
the Plan through payment in cash or through the issuance of Dana
common stock in satisfaction of such claims, and a limited
number of claims have been reinstated as liabilities of Dana.
During the bankruptcy process, the likelihood of settlement and
potential settlement outcomes was considered in evaluating
whether potential obligations were probable and estimable as of
the end of each reporting period.
As described in Emergence from Reorganization
Proceedings in Item 1, those unsecured nonpriority
claims in Class 5B under the Plan that are not resolved as
of the Effective Date have been effectively addressed by the
creation of a reserve of shares of Dana common stock that will
be available for distribution in satisfaction of these unsecured
nonpriority claims as they are resolved. The ultimate resolution
of these claims is not expected to have an impact on our
post-emergence financial condition or results of operations.
Inventories
Inventories are valued at the lower of cost or market. Cost is
generally determined on the
last-in,
first-out basis for U.S. inventories and on the
first-in,
first-out or average cost basis for
non-U.S. inventories.
Where appropriate, standard cost systems are utilized for
purposes of determining cost; the standards are adjusted as
necessary to ensure they approximate actual costs. Estimates of
reserves of surplus or obsolete inventory are determined at the
plant level and are based upon current economic conditions,
historical sales quantities and patterns and, in some cases, the
specific risk of loss on specifically identified inventories.
Warranty
Costs related to product warranty obligations are estimated and
accrued at the time of sale with a charge against cost of sales.
Warranty accruals are evaluated and adjusted as appropriate
based on occurrences giving rise to potential warranty exposure
and associated experience. Warranty accruals and adjustments
require significant judgment, including a determination of our
involvement in the matter giving rise to the potential warranty
issue or claim, our contractual requirements, estimates of units
requiring repair and estimates of repair costs. In June 2005, we
changed our method of accounting for warranty liabilities from
estimating the liability based only on the credit issued to the
customer, to accounting for the warranty liabilities based on
our total costs to settle the claim. We believe that this is a
change to a preferable method in that it more accurately
reflects the cost of settling the warranty liability. In
accordance with GAAP, the $6 pre-tax cumulative effect of the
change was recorded as of January 1, 2005 in the financial
statements. During the bankruptcy proceedings we continued to
honor our warranty obligations.
Contingency
Reserves
We have numerous other loss exposures, such as environmental
claims, product liability and litigation. Establishing loss
reserves for these matters requires the use of estimates and
judgment in regards to risk
57
exposure and ultimate liability. We estimate losses under the
programs using consistent and appropriate methods; however,
changes to our assumptions could materially affect our recorded
liabilities for loss.
Fresh Start
Accounting
As required by GAAP, in connection with emergence from
Chapter 11, we adopted the fresh start accounting
provisions of
SOP 90-7
effective February 1, 2008. Under
SOP 90-7,
the reorganization value represents the fair value of the entity
before considering liabilities and approximates the amount a
willing buyer would pay for the assets of Dana immediately after
restructuring. The reorganization value is allocated to the
respective fair value of assets. The excess reorganization value
over the fair value of identified tangible and intangible assets
is recorded as goodwill. Liabilities, other than deferred taxes,
are stated at present values of amounts expected to be paid.
Fair values of assets and liabilities represent our best
estimates based on independent appraisals and valuations. Where
the foregoing are not available, industry data and trends or
references to relevant market rates and transactions are used.
These estimates and assumptions are inherently subject to
significant uncertainties and contingencies beyond our
reasonable control. Moreover, the market value of our common
stock may differ materially from the fresh start equity
valuation.
|
|
Item 7A.
|
Quantitative
and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
|
We are exposed to various types of market risks including the
effects of fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates,
adverse movements in commodity prices for products we use in our
manufacturing and adverse changes in interest rates. To reduce
our exposure to these risks, we maintain risk management
controls to monitor these risks and take appropriate actions to
attempt to mitigate such forms of market risks.
Foreign Currency
Exchange Rate Risks
Our operating results may be impacted by buying, selling and
financing in currencies other than the functional currencies of
our operating companies. Where possible we focus on natural
hedging techniques which include the following:
(i) structuring foreign subsidiary balance sheets with
appropriate levels of debt to reduce subsidiary net investments
and subsidiary cash flow subject to conversion risk;
(ii) avoidance of risk by denominating contracts in the
appropriate functional currency and (iii) managing cash
flows on a net basis (both in timing and currency) to minimize
the exposure to foreign currency exchange rates.
After considering natural hedging techniques, some portions of
remaining exposure, especially for anticipated inter-company and
third party commercial transaction exposure in the short term,
may be hedged using financial derivatives, such as foreign
currency exchange rate forwards. Some of our foreign entities
were party to foreign currency contracts for anticipated
transactions in U.S. dollars, British pounds, Swedish
krona, euros, South African rand, Singapore dollars and
Australian dollars at the end of 2007.
In addition to the transactional exposure discussed above, our
operating results are impacted by the translation of our foreign
operating income into U.S. dollars (translation exposure).
We do not enter into foreign exchange contracts to mitigate
translation exposure.
Interest Rate
Risk
Our interest rate risk relates primarily to our exposure on
borrowing under the Exit Facility. Under the terms of the Exit
Facility we are required to enter into interest rate hedge
agreements by May 30, 2008 and to maintain agreements
covering a notional amount of not less than 50% of the aggregate
loans outstanding under the Term Facility for a period of no
less than three years.
Risk from Adverse
Movements in Commodity Prices
We purchase certain raw materials, including steel and other
metals, which are subject to price volatility caused by
fluctuations in supply and demand as well as other factors.
Higher costs of raw materials and other commodities used in the
production process have had a significant adverse impact on our
operating results
58
over the last three years. We continue to take actions to
mitigate the impact of higher commodity prices, including
cost-reduction programs, consolidation of our supply base and
negotiation of fixed price supply contracts with our commodity
suppliers. In addition, the sharing of increased raw material
costs has been, and will continue to be, the subject of
negotiations with our customers. No assurances can be given that
the magnitude and duration of increased commodity costs will not
have a material impact on our future operating results. We had
no derivatives in place at December 31, 2007 to hedge
commodity price movements.
59
|
|
Item 8.
|
Financial
Statements and Supplementary Data
|
Report of
Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
of Dana Holding Corporation (Formerly Dana Corporation)
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in
the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of Dana
Corporation (Debtor in Possession) (the Company) and its
subsidiaries at December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the results
of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 2007 in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United
States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial
statement schedule listed in the index appearing under
Item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects,
the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with
the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our
opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects,
effective internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2007, based on criteria established in
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway
Commission (COSO). The Companys management is responsible
for these financial statements and financial statement schedule,
for maintaining effective internal control over financial
reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting, included in
Managements Report on Internal Control Over Financial
Reporting appearing under Item 9A. Our responsibility is to
express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial
statement schedule, and on the Companys internal control
over financial reporting based on our integrated audits. We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those
standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are
free of material misstatement and whether effective internal
control over financial reporting was maintained in all material
respects. Our audits of the financial statements included
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the
accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, and evaluating the overall financial statement
presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial
reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal
control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a
material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design
and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the
assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinions.
As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial
statements, the Company changed the manner in which it accounts
for asset retirement obligations effective December 31,
2005, the manner in which it accounts for share based
compensation effective January 1, 2006 and the manner in
which it accounts for uncertain tax positions effective
January 1, 2007. As discussed in Notes 14 and 19 to
the consolidated financial statements, respectively, the Company
changed the manner in which it accounts for defined benefit
pension and other postretirement plans effective
December 31, 2006 and the manner in which it accounts for
warranty liabilities effective January 1, 2005.
As discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial
statements, the Company filed a petition on March 3, 2006
with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern
District of New York for reorganization under the provisions of
Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The Companys Third
Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of Debtors and Debtors in
Possession (as modified, the Plan) was confirmed on
December 26, 2007. Confirmation of the Plan resulted in the
discharge of certain claims against the Company that arose
before March 3, 2006 and substantially alters rights and
interests of equity security holders as provided for in the
Plan. The Plan was substantially consummated on January 31,
2008 and the Company emerged from bankruptcy. In connection with
its emergence from bankruptcy, the Company adopted fresh start
accounting.
A companys 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 companys
internal control over
60
financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that
(i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in
reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the
transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company;
(ii) 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 (iii) provide
reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the
companys 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/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Toledo, Ohio
March 14, 2008
61
Dana
Corporation
(Debtor in Possession)
Consolidated Statement of Operations
For the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
(In millions except per-share amounts)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net sales
|
|
$
|
8,721
|
|
|
$
|
8,504
|
|
|
$
|
8,611
|
|
Costs and expenses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost of sales
|
|
|
8,231
|
|
|
|
8,166
|
|
|
|
8,205
|
|
Selling, general and administrative expenses
|
|
|
365
|
|
|
|
419
|
|
|
|
500
|
|
Realignment charges, net
|
|
|
205
|
|
|
|
92
|
|
|
|
58
|
|
Impairment of assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
234
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment of goodwill
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
53
|
|
Other income, net
|
|
|
162
|
|
|
|
140
|
|
|
|
88
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before interest, reorganization
items and income taxes
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(313
|
)
|
|
|
(117
|
)
|
Interest expense (contractual interest of $213 and $204 for the
years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006)
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
|
115
|
|
|
|
168
|
|
Reorganization items, net
|
|
|
275
|
|
|
|
143
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(387
|
)
|
|
|
(571
|
)
|
|
|
(285
|
)
|
Income tax expense
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
|
|
(66
|
)
|
|
|
(924
|
)
|
Minority interests
|
|
|
(10
|
)
|
|
|
(7
|
)
|
|
|
(6
|
)
|
Equity in earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations
|
|
|
(433
|
)
|
|
|
(618
|
)
|
|
|
(1,175
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations before income taxes
|
|
|
(92
|
)
|
|
|
(142
|
)
|
|
|
(441
|
)
|
Income tax benefit (expense) of discontinued operations
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(118
|
)
|
|
|
(121
|
)
|
|
|
(434
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
(551
|
)
|
|
|
(739
|
)
|
|
|
(1,609
|
)
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(551
|
)
|
|
$
|
(739
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic loss per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before effect of change in
accounting
|
|
$
|
(2.89
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.11
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.86
|
)
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
|
|
(0.81
|
)
|
|
|
(2.90
|
)
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(3.68
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.92
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.73
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted loss per common share
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss from continuing operations before effect of change in
accounting
|
|
$
|
(2.89
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.11
|
)
|
|
$
|
(7.86
|
)
|
Loss from discontinued operations
|
|
|
(0.79
|
)
|
|
|
(0.81
|
)
|
|
|
(2.90
|
)
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(3.68
|
)
|
|
$
|
(4.92
|
)
|
|
$
|
(10.73
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash dividends declared and paid per common share
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
0.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average shares outstanding Basic
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
Average shares outstanding Diluted
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
151
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
62
Dana
Corporation
(Debtor in Possession)
Consolidated Balance Sheet
December 31, 2007 and 2006
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current assets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents
|
|
$
|
1,271
|
|
|
$
|
704
|
|
Restricted cash
|
|
|
93
|
|
|
|
15
|
|
Accounts receivable
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trade, less allowance for doubtful accounts of $20 in 2007 and
$23 in 2006
|
|
|
1,197
|
|
|
|
1,131
|
|
Other
|
|
|
295
|
|
|
|
235
|
|
Inventories
|
|
|
812
|
|
|
|
725
|
|
Assets of discontinued operations
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
|
392
|
|
Other current assets
|
|
|
100
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current assets
|
|
|
3,792
|
|
|
|
3,254
|
|
Goodwill
|
|
|
349
|
|
|
|
416
|
|
Investments and other assets
|
|
|
349
|
|
|
|
663
|
|
Investments in affiliates
|
|
|
172
|
|
|
|
555
|
|
Property, plant and equipment, net
|
|
|
1,763
|
|
|
|
1,776
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets
|
|
$
|
6,425
|
|
|
$
|
6,664
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities and Stockholders deficit
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current liabilities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable, including current portion of long-term debt
|
|
$
|
283
|
|
|
$
|
293
|
|
Debtor-in-possession
financing
|
|
|
900
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
|
1,072
|
|
|
|
886
|
|
Accrued payroll and employee benefits
|
|
|
258
|
|
|
|
225
|
|
Liabilities of discontinued operations
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
195
|
|
Taxes on income
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
95
|
|
Other accrued liabilities
|
|
|
418
|
|
|
|
322
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total current liabilities
|
|
|
2,952
|
|
|
|
2,016
|
|
Liabilities subject to compromise
|
|
|
3,511
|
|
|
|
4,175
|
|
Deferred employee benefits and other non-current liabilities
|
|
|
630
|
|
|
|
504
|
|
Long-term debt
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
Debtor-in-possession
financing
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
Commitments and contingencies (Note 18)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest in consolidated subsidiaries
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities
|
|
|
7,207
|
|
|
|
7,498
|
|
Common stock, $1 par value, authorized 350,
issued 150 in 2007 and 2006
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
Additional
paid-in-capital
|
|
|
202
|
|
|
|
201
|
|
Retained earnings (deficit)
|
|
|
(468
|
)
|
|
|
80
|
|
Accumulated other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
(666
|
)
|
|
|
(1,265
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholders deficit
|
|
|
(782
|
)
|
|
|
(834
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholders deficit
|
|
$
|
6,425
|
|
|
$
|
6,664
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
63
Dana
Corporation
(Debtor in Possession)
Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows
For the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
2005
|
|
|
Net cash flows provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
$
|
(52
|
)
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows investing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases of property, plant and equipment
|
|
|
(254
|
)
|
|
|
(314
|
)
|
|
|
(297
|
)
|
Proceeds from sale of businesses
|
|
|
414
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from sale of DCC assets and partnership interests
|
|
|
188
|
|
|
|
141
|
|
|
|
161
|
|
Proceeds from sale of other assets
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
54
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
Acquisition of business, net of cash acquired
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(17
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Payments received on leases and loans
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
Change in investments and other assets
|
|
|
14
|
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
Change in restricted cash
|
|
|
(78
|
)
|
|
|
(15
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
46
|
|
|
|
32
|
|
|
|
(19
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows provided by (used in) investing activities
|
|
|
348
|
|
|
|
(86
|
)
|
|
|
(54
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows financing activities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in short-term debt
|
|
|
(21
|
)
|
|
|
(551
|
)
|
|
|
492
|
|
Payments of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(205
|
)
|
|
|
(61
|
)
|
Proceeds from
debtor-in-possession
facility
|
|
|
200
|
|
|
|
700
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from European securitization program
|
|
|
119
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reduction in DCC Medium Term Notes
|
|
|
(132
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of long-term debt
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
16
|
|
Dividends paid
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows provided by (used in) financing activities
|
|
|
166
|
|
|
|
(49
|
)
|
|
|
398
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
|
|
|
462
|
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
128
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents beginning of year
|
|
|
704
|
|
|
|
762
|
|
|
|
634
|
|
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash balances
|
|
|
104
|
|
|
|
25
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net change in cash of discontinued operations
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents end of year
|
|
$
|
1,271
|
|
|
$
|
704
|
|
|
$
|
762
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reconciliation of net loss to net cash flows
operating activities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss
|
|
$
|
(551
|
)
|
|
$
|
(739
|
)
|
|
$
|
(1,605
|
)
|
Depreciation and amortization
|
|
|
279
|
|
|
|
278
|
|
|
|
310
|
|
Impairment and divestiture-related charges
|
|
|
131
|
|
|
|
405
|
|
|
|
515
|
|
Non-cash portion of U.K. pension charge
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reorganization items, net of payments
|
|
|
154
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
OPEB payments in excess of expense
|
|
|
(71
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payment to VEBAs for postretirement benefits
|
|
|
(27
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Minority interest
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
(16
|
)
|
Deferred income taxes
|
|
|
(29
|
)
|
|
|
(41
|
)
|
|
|
751
|
|
Unremitted earnings of affiliates
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(26
|
)
|
|
|
(40
|
)
|
Change in accounts receivable
|
|
|
(23
|
)
|
|
|
(62
|
)
|
|
|
146
|
|
Change in inventories
|
|
|
(5
|
)
|
|
|
10
|
|
|
|
81
|
|
Change in other current assets
|
|
|
26
|
|
|
|
29
|
|
|
|
(93
|
)
|
Change in accounts payable
|
|
|
110
|
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
(241
|
)
|
Change in other current liabilities
|
|
|
(25
|
)
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
|
(64
|
)
|
Effect of change in accounting
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4
|
)
|
Other
|
|
|
(65
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash flows provided by (used in) operating activities
|
|
$
|
(52
|
)
|
|
$
|
52
|
|
|
$
|
(216
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We paid Income taxes of $51, $87 and $127 and interest of $106,
$124 and $164 in 2007, 2006 and 2005.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
64
Dana
Corporation
(Debtor in Possession)
Consolidated Statement of Stockholders Equity (Deficit)
and Comprehensive Income (Loss)
(In millions)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive Income (Loss)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional
|
|
|
Retained
|
|
|
Foreign
|
|
|
Unrealized
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders
|
|
|
|
Common
|
|
|
Paid-In
|
|
|
Earnings
|
|
|
Currency
|
|
|
Gains
|
|
|
Postretirement
|
|
|
Equity
|
|
|
|
Stock
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
|
(Deficit)
|
|
|
Translation
|
|
|
(Losses)
|
|
|
Benefits
|
|
|
(Deficit)
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2004
|
|
$
|
150
|
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
|
$
|
2,479
|
|
|
$
|
(265
|
)
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
(143
|
)
|
|
$
|
2,411
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss for 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,605
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,605
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(125
|
)
|
Minimum pension liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
|
|
(152
|
)
|
Reclassification adjustment
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(210
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,815
|
)
|
Cash dividends declared
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(55
|
)
|
Issuance of shares for equity compensation plans, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2005
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
194
|
|
|
|
819
|
|
|
|
(323
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(295
|
)
|
|
|
545
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss for 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(739
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(739
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
135
|
|
Minimum pension liability
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
(83
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
52
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(687
|
)
|
Adjustment to initially apply SFAS No. 158 for pension
and OPEB
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(699
|
)
|
|
|
(699
|
)
|
Issuance of shares for equity compensation plans, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2006
|
|
|
150
|
|
|
|
201
|
|
|
|
80
|
|
|
|
(188
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,077
|
)
|
|
|
(834
|
)
|
Adoption of FIN 48 tax adjustment, January 1, 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
Comprehensive income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss for 2007
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(551
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(551
|
)
|
Foreign currency translation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
|
|
Pension and postretirement healthcare plan adjustments,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
568
|
|
|
|
568
|
|
Other
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
599
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
48
|
|
Issuance of shares for equity compensation plans, net
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance, December 31, 2007
|
|
$
|
150
|
|
|
$
|
202
|
|
|
$
|
(468
|
)
|
|
$
|
(155
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2
|
)
|
|
$
|
(509
|
)
|
|
$
|
(782
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of the consolidated
financial statements.
65
Dana
Corporation
Index to Notes to Consolidated
Financial Statements
1. Emergence from Reorganization Proceedings
2. Organization and Summary of Significant Accounting
Policies
3. Reorganization under Chapter 11 and Debtor
Financial Statements
4. Impairments, Asset Disposals, Divestitures and
Acquisitions
5. Discontinued Operations
6. Realignment of Operations
7. Inventories
8. Components of Certain Balance Sheet Amounts
9. Goodwill
10. Investments in Affiliates
11. Preferred Stock
12. Common Stock
13. Equity-Based Compensation
14. Pension and Postretirement Benefit Plans
15. Cash Deposits
16. Financing Agreements
17. Fair Value of Financial Instruments
18. Commitments and Contingencies
19. Warranty Obligations
20. Income Taxes
21. Other Income, Net
22. Segment, Geographical Area and Major Customer
Information
23. Reorganization and Fresh Start Accounting Pro Forma
Information (Unaudited)
66
Notes to
Consolidated Financial Statements
(In millions, except share and per share amounts)
|
|
Note 1.
|
Emergence from
Reorganization Proceedings
|
Organization
Dana Holding Corporation (Dana), incorporated in Delaware, is
headquartered in Toledo, Ohio. We are a leading supplier of
axle, driveshaft, structural, and sealing and thermal management
products for global vehicle manufacturers. Our people design and
manufacture products for every major vehicle producer in the
world. We employ approximately 35,000 people in 26
countries and operate 113 major facilities throughout the world.
As a result of Dana Corporations emergence from
Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the
Bankruptcy Code) on January 31, 2008 (the Effective Date),
Dana is the successor registrant to Dana Corporation (Prior
Dana) pursuant to
Rule 12g-3
under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
The terms Dana, we, our, and
us, when used in this report with respect to the
period prior to Dana Corporations emergence from
bankruptcy, are references to Prior Dana, and when used with
respect to the period commencing after Dana Corporations
emergence, are references to Dana. These references include the
subsidiaries of Prior Dana or Dana, as the case may be, unless
otherwise indicated or the context requires otherwise.
Emergence from
Reorganization Proceedings and Related Subsequent
Events
Background Dana and forty of its wholly-owned
subsidiaries (collectively, the Debtors) operated their
businesses as
debtors-in-possession
under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code from March 3,
2006 (the Filing Date) until emergence from Chapter 11 on
January 31, 2008. The Debtors Chapter 11 cases
(collectively, the Bankruptcy Cases) were consolidated in the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New
York (the Bankruptcy Court) under the caption In re Dana
Corporation, et al., Case
No. 06-10354
(BRL). Neither Dana Credit Corporation (DCC) and its
subsidiaries nor any of our
non-U.S. affiliates
were Debtors.
Claims resolution On December 26, 2007,
the Bankruptcy Court entered an order (the Confirmation Order)
confirming the Third Amended Joint Plan of Reorganization of
Debtors and
Debtors-in-Possession
(as modified, the Plan) and, on the Effective Date, the Plan was
consummated and we emerged from bankruptcy. As provided in the
Plan and the Confirmation Order, we issued and distributed
approximately 70 million shares of Dana common stock to
holders of allowed unsecured claims totaling approximately
$2,050. Pursuant to the Plan, we have issued and set aside
approximately 28 million additional shares of Dana common
stock for future distribution to all holders of allowed
unsecured nonpriority claims in Class 5B under the Plan.
These shares will be distributed as the disputed and
unliquidated claims (estimated not to exceed $800) are resolved.
The terms and conditions governing such distributions are set
forth in the Plan and the Confirmation Order.
As provided in the Plan and the Confirmation Order, asbestos
personal injury claims were reinstated, and holders of such
claims may continue to assert them. Certain other specific
categories of claims against the Debtors (primarily
workers compensation and intercompany liabilities to
non-Debtors) were retained and are being discharged in the
normal course of business.
Settlement obligations relating to non-pension retiree benefits
for retirees and union employees and long-term disability (LTD)
benefits for union claimants were satisfied with cash payments
of $788 to non-Dana sponsored Voluntary Employee Benefit
Associations (VEBAs) established for the benefit of the retirees
and union employees. Additionally, we paid DCC $49, the
remaining amount due to DCC noteholders, thereby settling
DCCs general unsecured claim of $325 against the Debtors.
DCC, in turn, used these funds to repay the noteholders in full.
Administrative claims, priority tax claims and other classes of
allowed claims of $222 were satisfied by payment of cash at
emergence, or will be satisfied with cash payments as soon
thereafter as practical.
67
Except as specifically provided in the Plan, the distributions
under the Plan were in exchange for, and in complete
satisfaction, discharge and release of, all claims and
third-party ownership interests in the Debtors arising on or
before the Effective Date, including any interest accrued on
such claims from and after the Filing Date.
Organization In connection with the formation
of a new holding company, we formed a new legal organization
aligned with how our businesses are managed operationally.
Except as described below, all operating assets and related
undischarged liabilities of Prior Dana were transferred to new
legal entities within the new holding company structure. Certain
other assets and liabilities, including those associated with
asbestos personal injury claims, were retained in Prior Dana,
which was then merged into Dana Companies, LLC, a consolidated
wholly owned subsidiary of Dana. The assets of Dana Companies,
LLC include insurance rights relating to coverage against these
liabilities and other assets sufficient to satisfy its
liabilities. Dana Companies, LLC will continue to process
asbestos personal injury claims in the normal course of business
and will continue to pay such claims in cash. Dana Companies,
LLC will be separately managed, and will have an independent
board member. The independent board member is required to
approve certain transactions including dividends or other
transfers of $1 or more of value to Dana. We expect our
involvement with Dana Companies, LLC will be limited to service
agreements for certain administrative activities. See
Note 18 for a discussion of our asbestos liabilities.
Common Stock Pursuant to the Plan, all of the
issued and outstanding shares of Prior Dana common stock, par
value $1.00 per share, and any other outstanding equity
securities of Prior Dana, including all options and warrants,
were cancelled. On the Effective Date, we began the process of
issuing 100 million shares of Dana common stock, par value
$0.01 per share, including approximately 70 million shares
for allowed unsecured nonpriority claims, approximately
28 million additional shares deposited to a reserve for
disputed unsecured nonpriority claims in Class 5B under the
Plan, approximately 1 million shares for payment of
post-emergence bonuses to union employees and approximately
1 million shares to pay bonuses to non-union hourly and
salaried non-management employees. The charge to earnings for
these bonuses will be recorded as of the Effective Date.
Preferred Stock Pursuant to the Plan, we
issued 2,500,000 shares of 4.0% Series A Preferred
Stock, par value $0.01 per share (the Series A Preferred)
and 5,400,000 shares of 4.0% Series B Preferred Stock,
par value $0.01 per share (the Series B Preferred) on the
Effective Date. The Series A Preferred was sold to
Centerbridge Partners, L.P. and certain of its affiliates
(Centerbridge) for $250, less a commitment fee of $3 and expense
reimbursement of $5, resulting in net proceeds of $242. The
Series B Preferred was sold to certain qualified investors
(as described in the Plan) for $540, less a commitment fee of
$11, resulting in net proceeds of $529.
In accordance with the terms of the preferred stock, all of the
shares of preferred stock are, at the holders option,
convertible into a number of fully paid and non-assessable
shares of common stock.
In accordance with the terms of the preferred stock, all of the
shares of preferred stock are, at the holders option,
convertible into a number of fully paid and non-assessable
shares of new common stock. The price at which each share of
preferred stock will be convertible into common stock is 83% of
its distributable market equity value per share, provided the
ownership percentage held following the hypothetical conversion
of all preferred stock falls within a range defined in the
Restated Certificate of Incorporation. The distributable market
equity value is the per share value of the common stock
determined by calculating the volume-weighted average trading
price of such common stock on the New York Stock Exchange for
the 22 trading days beginning on February 1, 2008 (the
first trading day after the Effective Date) but disregarding the
days with the highest and lowest volume-weighted average sales
price during such period. The
20-day
volume-weighted average trading price was $11.60.
The range of ownership is a function of our net debt plus the
value of our minority interests as of the Effective Date. If the
amount of our net debt plus the value of our minority interests
as of the Effective Date is $525, then 36.3% would be the upper
end of the range of ownership. Since the conversion of all
preferred stock at 83% of the $11.60 would result in more than
36.3% of our fully diluted common stock being issued to the
holders of preferred stock, the conversion price would be the
price at which the preferred stock is convertible
68
into 36.3% of our total common stock assuming conversion of all
preferred stock. The upper end of the range is subject to
adjustment, as provided in the Restated Certificate of
Incorporation, to the extent that our net debt plus the value of
our minority interests as of the Effective Date is an amount
other than $525. The initial conversion price is also subject to
certain adjustments as set forth in the Restated Certificate of
Incorporation.
Shares of Series A Preferred having an aggregate
liquidation preference of not more than $125 and the
Series B Preferred are convertible at any time at the
option of the applicable holder after July 31, 2008. The
remaining shares of Series A Preferred are convertible
after January 31, 2011. In addition, in the event that the
common stocks per share closing sales price exceeds 140%
of the conversion price divided by 0.83 for at least 20
consecutive trading days beginning on or after January 31,
2013, we will be able to force conversion of all, but not less
than all, of the preferred stock. The price at which the
preferred stock is convertible is subject to adjustment in
certain customary circumstances, including as a result of stock
splits and combinations, dividends and distributions and
issuances of common stock or common stock derivatives at a price
below the preferred stock conversion price in effect at that
time.
Dividends on the preferred stock are payable in cash at a rate
of 4% per annum on a quarterly basis. If at any time we fail to
pay the equivalent of six quarterly dividends on the preferred
stock, the holders of the preferred stock, voting separately as
a single class, will be entitled to elect two additional
directors to our Board of Directors. However, so long as
Centerbridge owns Series A Preferred having an aggregate
liquidation preference of at least $125, this provision will not
be applicable.
In connection with the issuance of the preferred stock, we
entered into two registration rights agreements: one with
Centerbridge and the other with the purchasers of Series B
Preferred, and we also entered into a shareholders agreement.
Under the terms of these agreements and the Restated Certificate
of Incorporation, Centerbridge was granted representation on our
Board of Directors and limited approval rights. See Note 11
for additional information.
Financing at emergence On the Effective Date,
Dana, as borrower, and certain of our domestic subsidiaries, as
guarantors, entered into an exit financing facility (the Exit
Facility) with Citicorp USA, Inc., Lehman Brothers Inc. and
Barclays Capital. The Exit Facility consists of a Term Facility
Credit and Guaranty Agreement in the total aggregate amount of
$1,430 (the Term Facility) and a $650 Revolving Credit and
Guaranty Agreement (the Revolving Facility). The Term Facility
was fully drawn in borrowings of $1,350 on the Effective Date
and $80 on February 1, 2008. There were no borrowings under
the Revolving Facility, but $200 was utilized for existing
letters of credit. Net proceeds from the Exit Facility were
$1,276 after $114 of original issue discount and $40 of
customary issuance costs and fees. The net proceeds were used to
repay the Senior Secured Superpriority
Debtor-in-Possession
Credit Agreement (DIP Credit Agreement), make other payments
required upon exit from bankruptcy and provide liquidity to fund
working capital and other general corporate purposes. See
Note 16 for the terms and conditions of these facilities.
Fresh Start Accounting As required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States
(GAAP), we adopted fresh start accounting effective
February 1, 2008 following the guidance of American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants (AICPA)
Statement of Position
90-7,
Financial Reporting by Entities in Reorganization under
the Bankruptcy Code
(SOP 90-7).
The financial statements for the periods ended December 31,
2007 and prior do not include the effect of any changes in our
capital structure or changes in the fair value of assets and
liabilities as a result of fresh start accounting. See
Note 23 for an unaudited pro-forma presentation of the
impact of emergence from reorganization and fresh start
accounting on our financial position.
|
|
Note 2.
|
Organization and
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
|
Organization We serve the majority of the
worlds vehicular manufacturers as a leader in the
engineering, manufacture and distribution of original equipment
systems and components, and we continue to manufacture and
supply a variety of service parts. We had also been a provider
of lease financing services in selected markets through our
wholly-owned subsidiary, DCC. Over the last five years, DCC has
sold significant portions of its asset portfolio, and in
September 2006 adopted a plan of liquidation of substantially
all its remaining assets (See Note 4).
69
Basis of Presentation As discussed in
Note 3, the Debtors reorganized under Chapter 11 of
the United States Bankruptcy Code.
SOP 90-7,
which is applicable to companies operating under
Chapter 11, generally does not change the manner in which
financial statements are prepared. However,
SOP 90-7
does require that the financial statements for periods
subsequent to the filing of a Chapter 11 petition
distinguish transactions and events that are directly associated
with the reorganization from the ongoing operations of the
business.
We adopted
SOP 90-7
on the Filing Date and prepared our financial statements in
accordance with its requirements. Revenues, expenses, realized
gains and losses and provisions for losses that can be directly
associated with the reorganization and restructuring of our
business are reported separately as reorganization items in our
statement of operations. Our balance sheet distinguishes
pre-petition liabilities subject to compromise both from those
pre-petition liabilities that are not subject to compromise and
from post-petition liabilities. Liabilities that were affected
by the plan of reorganization were reported at the amounts
expected to be allowed by the Bankruptcy Court. In connection
with our emergence from bankruptcy certain liabilities
previously reported as subject to compromise were retained by
Dana. These liabilities were reclassified to the appropriate
liability caption as of December 31, 2007. In addition,
cash provided by or used for reorganization items is disclosed
separately in our statement of cash flows. See Note 3 for
further information about our financial statement presentation
under
SOP 90-7.
Estimates These consolidated financial
statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States (GAAP), which require
the use of estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the
amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and
accompanying disclosures. Some of the more significant estimates
include: valuation of deferred tax assets and inventories;
restructuring, environmental, product liability and warranty
accruals; valuation of post-employment and postretirement
benefits; valuation, depreciation and amortization of long-lived
assets; valuation of goodwill; residual values of leased assets
and allowances for doubtful accounts. We believe our assumptions
and estimates are reasonable and appropriate. However, due to
the inherent uncertainties in making estimates, actual results
could differ from those estimates.
Principles of Consolidation Our consolidated
financial statements include all subsidiaries in which we have
the ability to control operating and financial policies. All
significant intercompany balances and transactions have been
eliminated in consolidation. Affiliated companies (20% to 50%
ownership) are generally recorded in the statements using the
equity method of accounting, as are certain investments in
partnerships and limited liability companies in which we may
have an ownership interest of less than 20%. Historically,
certain of the equity affiliates that were engaged in lease
financing activities qualified as Variable Interest Entities
(VIEs). In addition, certain leveraged leases qualified as VIEs
but were not required to be consolidated under Financial
Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 46(R),
Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities, an
interpretation of ARB No. 51
(FIN No. 46(R)). Accordingly, these leveraged leases
were not consolidated and were included with other investments
in equity affiliates. Other investments in leveraged leases that
qualify as VIEs were consolidated. Substantially all of these
investments have been sold as of December 31, 2007.
Operations of affiliates accounted for under the equity method
of accounting are generally included for periods ended within
one month of our year-end. Less than 20%-owned companies are
included in the financial statements at the cost of our
investment. Dividends, royalties and fees from these cost basis
affiliates are recorded in income when received.
Discontinued Operations In accordance with
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 144,
Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived
Assets, we classify a business component that either has
been disposed of or is classified as held for sale as a
discontinued operation if the cash flow of the component has
been or will be eliminated from our ongoing operations and we
will no longer have any significant continuing involvement in
the component. The results of operations of our discontinued
operations through the date of sale, including any gains or
losses on disposition, are aggregated and presented on two lines
in the income statement. SFAS No. 144 requires the
reclassification of amounts presented for prior years to reflect
their classification as discontinued operations.
70
With respect to the consolidated balance sheet, the assets and
liabilities not subject to compromise relating to our
discontinued operations are aggregated and reported separately
as assets and liabilities of discontinued operations following
the decision to dispose of the components. The balance sheet at
December 31, 2006 reflects our announced plans to sell our
engine hard parts, fluid products and pump products businesses.
The balance sheet at December 31, 2007 includes the
residual assets and liabilities of certain pump products
operations yet to be sold. In the consolidated statement of cash
flows, the cash flows of discontinued operations are included in
the applicable line items with continuing operations. See
Note 5 for additional information regarding discontinued
operations.
Cash and Cash Equivalents For purposes of
reporting cash flows, we consider highly liquid investments with
maturities of three months or less when purchased to be cash
equivalents. Marketable securities that satisfy the criteria for
cash equivalents are classified accordingly.
At December 31, 2007, we maintained cash deposits of $111
to provide credit enhancement for certain lease agreements,
letters of credit and bank guarantees and to support surety
bonds that allow us to self-insure certain employee benefit
obligations. These financial arrangements are typically renewed
each year. The deposits generally can be withdrawn if we provide
comparable security in the form of letters of credit. These
banking facilities provide for the issuance of letters of
credit, and the availability at December 31, 2007 was
adequate to cover the amounts on deposit.
The ability to move cash among operating locations is subject to
the operating needs of those locations in addition to locally
imposed restrictions on the transfer of funds in the form of
dividends, cash advances or loans. In addition, we must meet
distributable reserve requirements. Restricted net assets
related to our consolidated subsidiaries totaled $167 as of
December 31, 2007. Of this amount, $75 and $69 are
attributable to our Venezuelan and Chinese operations and are
subject to strict governmental limitations on our
subsidiaries ability to transfer funds outside each of
those countries, and $23 is attributable to cash deposits
required by certain of our Canadian subsidiaries in connection
with credit enhancements on lease agreements, letters of credit
and the support of surety bonds. An additional $93 of cash held
by DCC at December 31, 2007 was also restricted by the
forbearance agreement discussed in Notes 4 and 16.
Condensed financial information of registrant (Parent
company information) (Schedule I) is required to be
included in reports on
Form 10-K
when a registrants proportionate share of restricted net
assets (as defined in
Rule 4-08(e)
of
Regulation S-X)
exceeds 25% of total consolidated net assets. The purpose of
this disclosure is to provide information on restrictions that
limit the payment of dividends by the registrant. We have not
provided Schedule I for the following reasons. First, as
debtors in possession in a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceeding
during 2007, we were precluded from paying dividends to our
stockholders and therefore other restrictions are not
significant. Second, the amount of our restricted net assets of
consolidated subsidiaries in relation to the assets of our
consolidated subsidiaries without restrictions is not material.
At December 31, 2007, we had a consolidated
stockholders deficit and, as discussed above, $167 of
restricted distributable net assets in consolidated
subsidiaries. Third, the debtor company financial information in
Note 3 provides information as of and for the year ended
December 31, 2007 that is more meaningful than the
information that would be contained in Schedule I. While
the debtor company financial information includes both the
parent company and the subsidiaries included in the bankruptcy
filing, there are no restrictions on asset distributions from
these subsidiaries to the parent company.
Financial information for 2005 is not presented in Note 3
because it is not required. However, for the reasons described
above, we do not believe the information from earlier periods is
relevant to the users of our financial statements. During 2007,
2006 and 2005, the parent company received dividends from
consolidated subsidiaries of $76, $81 and $238. Dividends from
less than 50%-owned affiliates in each of the last three years
was $1 or less.
Inventories Inventories are valued at the
lower of cost or market. Cost is generally determined on the
last-in,
first-out (LIFO) basis for U.S. inventories and on the
first-in,
first-out (FIFO) or average cost basis for
71
non-U.S. inventories.
In connection with our adoption of fresh start accounting on
February 1, 2008, inventories were revalued to their fair
market value. See Note 23 for an unaudited pro-forma
estimated impact of the fresh start valuation.
Property, Plant and Equipment Property, plant
and equipment is recorded at historical costs unless impaired.
Depreciation is recognized over the estimated useful lives using
primarily the straight-line method for financial reporting
purposes and accelerated depreciation methods for federal income
tax purposes. Useful lives for buildings and building
improvements, machinery and equipment, tooling and office
equipment, furniture and fixtures principally range from twenty
to thirty years, five to ten years, three to five years and
three to ten years. In connection with our adoption of fresh
start accounting on February 1, 2008, fixed assets were
revalued to their fair market value, generally their appraised
value, and new lives were established. See Note 23 for an
unaudited pro-forma estimated impact of the fresh start
valuation.
Impairment of Long-Lived Assets We review the
carrying value of long-lived assets 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 the assets to the undiscounted future net
cash flows expected to be generated by the assets. If such
assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to be
recognized is measured by the amount by which the carrying
amount of the assets exceeds the fair value of the assets.
Assets to be disposed of are reported at the lower of the
carrying amount or fair values less costs to sell and are no
longer depreciated.
Pre-Production Costs Related to Long-Term Supply
Arrangements The costs of tooling used to make
products sold under long-term supply arrangements are
capitalized as part of property, plant and equipment and
amortized over their useful lives if we own the tooling or if we
fund the purchase but our customer owns the tooling and grants
us the irrevocable right to use the tooling over the contract
period. If we have a contractual right to bill our customers,
costs incurred in connection with the design and development of
tooling are carried as a component of other accounts receivable
until invoiced. Design and development costs related to customer
products are deferred if we have an agreement to collect such
costs from the customer; otherwise, they are expensed when
incurred. At December 31, 2007, the machinery and equipment
component of property, plant and equipment included $7 of our
tooling related to long-term supply arrangements and $8 of our
customers tooling which we have the irrevocable right to
use, while trade and other accounts receivable included $67 of
costs related to tooling that we have a contractual right to
collect from our customers.
Lease Financing Lease financing consists of
direct financing leases, leveraged leases and operating leases
on equipment. Income on direct financing leases is recognized by
a method that produces a constant periodic rate of return on the
outstanding investment in the lease. Income on leveraged leases
is recognized by a method that produces a constant rate of
return on the outstanding net investment in the lease, net of
the related deferred tax liability, in the years in which the
net investment is positive. Initial direct costs are deferred
and amortized using the interest method over the lease period.
Operating leases for equipment are recorded at cost, net of
accumulated depreciation. Income from operating leases is
recognized ratably over the term of the leases. In 2006, we
adopted a plan to accelerate the sale of these leases and
recorded an impairment charge of $176 (see Note 4). At
December 31, 2007, one lease remains with a carrying value,
net of non-recourse borrowing, of less than $1.
Allowance for Losses on Lease Financing
Provisions for losses on lease financing receivables were
determined based on loss experience and assessment of inherent
risk. Adjustments were made to the allowance for losses to
adjust the net investment in lease financing to an estimated
collectible amount. Income recognition was generally
discontinued on accounts that were contractually past due and
where no payment activity had occurred within 120 days.
Accounts were charged against the allowance for losses when
determined to be uncollectible. Accounts where asset
repossession had started as the primary means of recovery were
classified within other assets at their estimated realizable
value.
Goodwill In accordance with
SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible
Assets, we test goodwill for impairment on an annual basis
as of December 31 unless conditions arise that warrant a more
frequent valuation. In assessing the recoverability of goodwill,
projections regarding estimated future cash flows and
72
other factors are made to determine the fair value of the
respective assets. If these estimates or related projections
change in the future, we may be required to record goodwill
impairment charges.
Financial Instruments The reported fair
values of financial instruments are based on a variety of
factors. Where available, fair values represent quoted market
prices for identical or comparable instruments. Where quoted
market prices are not available, fair values are estimated based
on assumptions concerning the amount and timing of estimated
future cash flows and assumed discount rates reflecting varying
degrees of credit risk. Fair values may not represent actual
values of the financial instruments that could be realized as of
the balance sheet date or that will be realized in the future.
Derivative Financial Instruments We enter
into forward currency contracts to hedge our exposure to the
effects of currency fluctuations on a portion of our projected
sales and purchase commitments. The changes in the fair value of
these contracts are recorded in cost of sales and are generally
offset by exchange gains or losses on the underlying exposures.
We may also use interest rate swaps to manage exposure to
fluctuations in interest rates and to adjust the mix of our
fixed and floating rate debt. We do not use derivatives for
trading or speculative purposes, and we do not hedge all of our
exposures.
We follow SFAS No. 133, Accounting for
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and
SFAS No. 138, Accounting for Certain Derivative
Instruments and Certain Hedging Transactions. These
Statements require, among other things, that all derivative
instruments be recognized on the balance sheet at fair value.
Forward currency contracts have not been designated as hedges,
and the effect of marking these instruments to market has been
recognized in the results of operations.
Environmental Compliance and Remediation
Environmental expenditures that relate to current operations
are expensed or capitalized as appropriate. Expenditures that
relate to existing conditions caused by past operations that do
not contribute to our current or future revenue generation are
expensed. Liabilities are recorded when environmental
assessments
and/or
remedial efforts are probable and the costs can be reasonably
estimated. Estimated costs are based upon current laws and
regulations, existing technology and the most probable method of
remediation. The costs are not discounted and exclude the
effects of inflation. If the cost estimates result in a range of
equally probable amounts, the lower end of the range is accrued.
Settlements with Insurers In certain
circumstances we commute policies that provide insurance for
asbestos personal injury claims. Proceeds from commutations in
excess of our estimated receivable recorded for pending and
future claims are generally deferred.
Pension Benefits We sponsor a number of
defined benefit pension plans covering eligible salaried and
hourly employees. Benefits are determined based upon
employees length of service, wages or a combination of
length of service and wages. Our practice is to fund these costs
through deposits with trustees in amounts that, at a minimum,
satisfy the applicable local funding regulations. Annual net
pension benefits expenses and the related liabilities are
determined on an actuarial basis. These amounts are dependent on
managements assumptions used by actuaries. We review these
actuarial assumptions annually and make modifications when
necessary. With the input of independent actuaries and other
relevant sources, we believe that the assumptions used are
reasonable; however, changes in these assumptions, or experience
different from that assumed, could impact our financial
position, results of operations, or cash flows. See Note 14
for additional information.
Postretirement Benefits Other than Pensions
We provide other postretirement benefits including medical
and life insurance for certain eligible employees upon
retirement. Benefits are determined primarily based upon
employees length of service and include applicable
employee cost sharing. Our policy is to fund these benefits as
they become due. Annual net postretirement benefits expense and
the related liabilities are determined on an actuarial basis.
These amounts are dependent on managements assumptions
used by actuaries. We review these actuarial assumptions
annually and make modifications when necessary. With the input
of independent actuaries and other relevant sources, we believe
that the assumptions used are reasonable; however, changes in
these assumptions, or experience different from that assumed,
could impact our financial position, results of operations, or
cash flows. See Note 14 for additional information and a
discussion of the reduction of the domestic benefits.
73
Postemployment Benefits Costs to provide
postemployment benefits to employees are accounted for on an
accrual basis. Obligations that do not accumulate or vest are
recorded when payment of the benefits is probable and the
amounts can be reasonably estimated. Our policy is to fund these
benefits equal to our cash basis obligation. Annual net
postemployment benefits expense and the related liabilities are
accrued as service is rendered for those obligations that
accumulate or vest and can be reasonably estimated.
Equity-Based Compensation Effective
January 1, 2006, we adopted SFAS No. 123(R),
Share-Based Payments (SFAS No. 123(R)). We
measure compensation cost arising from the grant of share-based
awards to employees at fair value and recognize such costs in
income over the period during which the service is provided,
usually the vesting period. We adopted SFAS No. 123(R)
using the modified prospective transition method, and recognized
compensation expense for all awards granted after
December 31, 2005 and for the unvested portion of
outstanding awards at the date of adoption.
Revenue Recognition Sales are recognized when
products are shipped and risk of loss has transferred to the
customer. We accrue for warranty costs, sales returns and other
allowances based on experience and other relevant factors, when
sales are recognized. Adjustments are made as new information
becomes available. Shipping and handling fees billed to
customers are included in sales, while costs of shipping and
handling are included in cost of sales. We record taxes
collected from customers on a net basis (excluded from revenues).
Supplier agreements with our OEM customers generally provide for
fulfillment of the customers purchasing requirements over
vehicle program lives, which generally range from three to ten
years. Prices for product shipped under the programs are
established at inception, with subsequent pricing adjustments
mutually agreed through negotiation. Pricing adjustments are
occasionally determined retroactively based on historical
shipments and either paid or received, as appropriate, in lump
sum to effectuate the price settlement. Retroactive price
increases are deferred upon receipt and amortized over the
remaining life of the appropriate program, unless the
retroactive price increase was determined to have been received
under contract or legal provisions in which case revenue is
recognized upon receipt.
Foreign Currency Translation The financial
statements of subsidiaries and equity affiliates outside the
U.S. located in non-highly inflationary economies are
measured using the currency of the primary economic environment
in which they operate as the functional currency, which
typically is the local currency. Transaction gains and losses
resulting from translating assets and liabilities of these
entities into the functional currency are included in Other
income. When translating into U.S. dollars, income and
expense items are translated at average monthly rates of
exchange, while assets and liabilities are translated at the
rates of exchange at the balance sheet date. Translation
adjustments resulting from translating the functional currency
into U.S. dollars are deferred and included as a component
of Comprehensive loss in stockholders equity. For
affiliates whose functional currency is the U.S. dollar,
non-monetary assets are translated into U.S. dollars at
historical exchange rates and monetary assets are translated at
current exchange rates. Translation expense included in net
income for these affiliates were $2 in 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Income Taxes In the ordinary course of
business there is inherent uncertainty in quantifying our income
tax positions. We assess our income tax positions and record tax
liabilities for all years subject to examination based upon
managements evaluation of the facts and circumstances and
information available at the reporting dates. For those tax
positions where it is more-likely-than-not that a tax benefit
will be sustained, we have recorded the largest amount of tax
benefit with a greater than 50% likelihood of being realized
upon ultimate settlement with a taxing authority that has full
knowledge of all relevant information. For those income tax
positions where it is not more-likely-than-not that a tax
benefit will be sustained, no tax benefit has been recognized in
the financial statements. Where applicable, associated interest
has also been recognized.
We adopted the provision of Financial Accounting Standards Board
(FASB) Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for
Uncertainty in Income Taxes, (FIN 48) on
January 1, 2007. As a result of this adoption, we
recognized a credit of approximately $3 to the 2007 beginning
retained earnings balance. We recognize interest accrued
relative to unrecognized tax benefits and penalties, if
incurred, as a component of income tax expense. Interest income
or expense relating to income tax audit adjustments and
settlements is recognized
74
as a component of income tax expense or benefit. Net interest
expense of $9, $12 and $6 was recognized in 2007, 2006 and 2005.
Deferred income taxes are provided for future tax effects
attributable to temporary differences between the recorded
values of assets and liabilities for financial reporting
purposes and the bases of such assets and liabilities as
measured by tax laws and regulations. Deferred income taxes are
also provided for net operating losses (NOLs), tax credit and
other carryforwards. Amounts are stated at enacted tax rates
expected to be in effect when taxes are actually paid or
recovered. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of
a change in tax rates is recognized in the results of continuing
operations in the period that includes the enactment date.
In accordance with SFAS No. 109, Accounting for
Income Taxes, in each reporting period we assess whether
it is more likely than not that we will generate sufficient
future taxable income to realize our deferred tax assets. This
assessment requires significant judgment and, in making this
evaluation, we consider all available positive and negative
evidence. Such evidence includes trends and expectations for
future U.S. and
non-U.S. pre-tax
operating income, our historical earnings and losses, the time
period over which our temporary differences and carryforwards
will reverse and the implementation of feasible and prudent tax
planning strategies. While the assumptions require significant
judgment, they are consistent with the plans and estimates we
are using to manage the underlying business.
We provide a valuation allowance against our deferred tax assets
if, based upon available evidence, we determine that it is more
likely than not that some portion or all of the recorded
deferred tax assets will not be realized in future periods.
Creating a valuation allowance serves to increase income tax
expense during the reporting period. Once created, a valuation
allowance against deferred tax assets is maintained until
realization of the deferred tax asset is judged more likely than
not to occur. Reducing a valuation allowance against deferred
tax assets serves to reduce income tax expense in the reporting
period of change unless the reduction occurs due to the
expiration of the underlying loss or tax credit carryforward
period. See Note 20 for an explanation of the valuation
allowance adjustments made for our net deferred tax assets. See
Note 20 for additional information on income taxes.
Reclassifications Certain prior period
amounts have been reclassified to conform to the current year
presentation.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements In December
2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 141(R), Business
Combinations (SFAS No. 141(R)). This Statement
replaces SFAS No. 141, Business
Combinations. SFAS No. 141(R) retains the
fundamental requirements of SFAS No. 141 that the
purchase method of accounting (now referred to as the
acquisition method) be used for all business combinations and
for an acquirer to be identified for each business combination.
SFAS 141(R) defines the acquirer as the entity that obtains
control of one or more businesses in the business combination
and establishes the acquisition date as the date that the
acquirer achieves control. SFAS 141(R) applies to all
transactions or other events in which the acquirer obtains
control of one or more businesses, including those achieved
without the transfer of consideration. The accounting for
business combinations requires that the business, as well as the
underlying assets and liabilities, should be recorded at fair
value, including contingencies and earn-out arrangements such as
contingent consideration. SFAS No. 141(R) applies
prospectively and is effective for fiscal years beginning on or
after December 15, 2008, with early adoption prohibited. We
are evaluating the requirements of SFAS No. 141(R) and we
have not yet determined the effect, if any, it will have on our
consolidated financial statements in 2009.
In December 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 160,
Noncontrolling Interests in Consolidated Financial
Statements, amendment of ARB No. 51.
SFAS No. 160 establishes accounting and reporting
standards for the noncontrolling interest, sometimes called a
minority interest, in a subsidiary and for the deconsolidation
of a subsidiary. Noncontrolling interests should be classified
as a component of equity. SFAS No. 160 establishes a
single method of accounting for changes in a parents
ownership interest in a subsidiary that do not result in
deconsolidation and requires expanded disclosures that clearly
identify and distinguish between the interests of the
parents owners and the interests of the noncontrolling
owners of a subsidiary. SFAS No. 160 requires
retroactive adoption of the presentation and disclosure
requirements for existing minority interests with all other
requirements applied prospectively. SFAS No. 160 is
effective for fiscal years beginning on or
75
after December 15, 2008, with early adoption prohibited. We
are evaluating the requirements of SFAS No. 160 and we have
not yet determined the effect, if any, it will have on our
consolidated financial statements in 2009.
In February 2007, the FASB issued SFAS No. 159,
The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial
Liabilities Including an Amendment of FASB Statement
No. 115. SFAS No. 159 permits an entity to
choose to measure many financial instruments and certain other
items at fair value. Most of the provisions in
SFAS No. 159 are elective; however, the amendment to
SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments
in Debt and Equity Securities, applies to all entities
with available-for-sale and trading securities. The fair value
option established by SFAS No. 159 permits companies
to choose to measure eligible items at fair value at specified
election dates. Entities that elect the fair value option must
report unrealized gains and losses on items for which the fair
value option has been elected in earnings at each subsequent
reporting date. SFAS No. 159 is effective as of the
beginning of an entitys first fiscal year that begins
after November 15, 2007. We adopted SFAS No. 159
as of January 1, 2008 and expect that adoption will have
little or no effect on our consolidated financial statements in
2008.
In September 2006, the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force
(EITF) promulgated Issue
No. 06-4,
Accounting for Deferred Compensation and Postretirement
Benefit Aspects of Endorsement Split-Dollar Life Insurance
Arrangements (EITF
No. 06-4).
In March 2007, the EITF promulgated Issue
No. 06-10,
Accounting for Collateral Assignment Split-Dollar Life
Insurance Arrangements (EITF
No. 06-10).
EITF Nos.
06-4 and
06-10
require a company that provides a benefit to an employee under
an endorsement or collateral assignment split-dollar life
insurance arrangement that extends to postretirement periods to
recognize a liability and related compensation costs. We have
adopted EITF Nos.
06-4 and
06-10
effective in the first quarter of 2008. The effect of adoption
on our consolidated financial statements was immaterial.
In September 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 157,
Fair Value Measurements. SFAS No. 157
defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair
value and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
SFAS No. 157 is effective for fiscal years beginning
after November 15, 2007. In February 2008, the FASB decided
to defer the effective date of SFAS No. 157 for all
nonfinancial assets and nonfinancial liabilities, except those
that are recognized or disclosed at fair value in the financial
statements on a recurring basis (at least annually). We expect
to use the new definitions of fair value upon adoption of
SFAS 157 on January 1, 2008. We will apply the
applicable disclosure requirements of SFAS 157 in our 2008
financial statements.
In July 2006, the FASB issued FIN 48 prescribing a
comprehensive model for how a company should recognize, measure,
present and disclose in its financial statements uncertain tax
positions that a company has taken or expects to take on a tax
return. We adopted the provisions of FIN 48 on
January 1, 2007 and increased 2007 beginning retained
earnings by approximately $3. Refer to Note 20 for more
information on the adoption of FIN 48.
|
|
Note 3.
|
Reorganization
under Chapter 11 and Debtor Financial Statements
|
The Bankruptcy Cases were jointly administered, with the Debtors
managing their businesses as debtors in possession subject to
the supervision of the Bankruptcy Court. We continued normal
business operations during the bankruptcy process and emerged
from bankruptcy on January 31, 2008.
Claims
resolution
See Note 1 for an explanation of the distributions. Except
as specifically provided in the Plan, the distributions under
the Plan were in exchange for, and in complete satisfaction,
discharge and release of, all claims and third-party ownership
interests in the Debtors arising on or before the Effective
Date, including any interest accrued on such claims from and
after the Filing Date.
76
Pre-petition
Debt
Our bankruptcy filing had triggered the immediate acceleration
of certain direct financial obligations of the Debtors,
including, among others, an aggregate of $1,621 in principal and
accrued interest on outstanding unsecured notes issued under our
1997, 2001, 2002 and 2004 indentures. Such amounts were
characterized as unsecured debt for purposes of the
reorganization proceedings and the related obligations are
classified as liabilities subject to compromise in our
consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2007.
In accordance with
SOP 90-7,
following the Filing Date, we recorded the Debtors
pre-petition debt instruments at the allowed claim amount, as
defined by
SOP 90-7,
and we accelerated the amortization of the related deferred debt
issuance costs, the original issuance discounts and the
valuation adjustment related to the termination of interest rate
swaps. These items resulted in a pre-tax charge of $17 during
March 2006 that is included in reorganization items in our
consolidated statement of operations. In addition, we
discontinued recording interest expense on debt classified as
liabilities subject to compromise.
Reorganization
Initiatives
It was critical to the Debtors successful emergence from
bankruptcy that they (i) maintain positive margins for
their products through substantial price increases from their
customers; (ii) continue to recover or otherwise provide
for increased material costs through renegotiation or rejection
of various customer programs; (iii) realize the
restructured wage and benefit programs from settlement
agreements with two primary unions which eliminate the excessive
cash requirements of the legacy pension and other postretirement
benefit liabilities accumulated over the years;
(iv) realize the benefits of changes in the manufacturing
footprint that eliminated excess capacity, closed and
consolidated facilities and repositioned operations in lower
cost facilities and (v) continue the permanent reduction
and realignment of their overhead costs.
Plan of
Reorganization
On December 26, 2007, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order
confirming our Plan and, on January 31, 2008, the Plan was
consummated and we emerged from our reorganization with a
significantly restructured balance sheet.
The Plan and the related disclosure statement describe the
organization, operations and financing of the reorganized
Debtors. Among other things, the Plan incorporates certain
provisions of the following agreements: (i) the settlement
agreements with the United Steel, Paper and Forestry, Rubber,
Manufacturing, Energy, Allied Industrial and Service Workers
International Union (the USW) and the International Union,
United Automobile, Aerospace and Agricultural Implement Workers
of America (the UAW) (Union Settlement Agreements);
(ii) the investment agreement with Centerbridge Capital
Partners, L.P. and CBP Parts Acquisition Co. LLC, a Centerbridge
affiliate, that provides for the Centerbridge affiliate to
purchase $250 in Series A Preferred of Dana, with qualified
creditors of the Debtors (i.e., creditors who meet
specific criteria) having an opportunity to purchase up to $540
in Series B Preferred on a pro rata basis (the Investment
Agreement); (iii) the support agreement by and among Dana,
the USW, the UAW, Centerbridge and certain creditors of ours
(the Plan Support Agreement); and (iv) a letter agreement
dated October 18, 2007 with us, specified members of the ad
hoc steering committee of bondholders and their affiliates (the
Backstop Investors) (the Backstop Commitment Letter) who
severally agreed to purchase up to $290 in Series B
Preferred that are not subscribed for by qualified supporting
creditors in the offering or purchased by Centerbridge in
accordance with its obligations under the Investment Agreement.
Through these arrangements, Dana issued $790 of preferred stock
through the offering to Centerbridge and the Backstop Investors.
After commitment fees of $14 and other customary costs of $5,
the net proceeds were $771.
The disclosure statement contained certain information about the
Debtors pre-petition operating and financial history, the
events leading up to the commencement of the Bankruptcy Cases
and significant events that occurred during the Bankruptcy
Cases. The disclosure statement also described the terms and
provisions of the Plan, including certain effects of
confirmation of the Plan, certain risk factors associated
77
with securities to be issued under the Plan, certain
alternatives to the Plan, and the manner in which distributions
were to be made under the Plan.
DIP Credit
Agreement
In March 2006, the Bankruptcy Court approved our $1,450 DIP
Credit Agreement, originally consisting of a $750 revolving
credit facility and a $700 term loan facility. This facility
provided funding to continue our operations without disruption
and meet our obligations to suppliers, customers and employees
during the Chapter 11 reorganization process. In January
2007, the Bankruptcy Court approved an amendment to the DIP
Credit Agreement to increase the term loan facility by $200 to
$900, subject to certain terms and conditions. Also in January
2007, we permanently reduced the aggregate commitment under the
revolving credit facility from $750 to $650. As a result of
these actions, the DIP Credit Agreement was $1,550 at
December 31, 2007. Upon emergence, amounts outstanding
under the DIP Credit Agreement were repaid from the proceeds of
the Exit Facility. See Note 16 for a discussion of the
terms and conditions of the DIP Credit Agreement and the Exit
Facility.
DCC
Notes
DCC was a non-Debtor subsidiary of Dana. At the time of our
bankruptcy filing, DCC had outstanding notes totaling
approximately $399. In December 2006, DCC and most of its
noteholders executed a Forbearance Agreement under which
(i) the forbearing noteholders agreed not to exercise their
rights or remedies with respect to the DCC Notes for a period of
24 months (or until the effective date of our plan of
reorganization). Since then, DCC has sold substantially all of
its remaining asset portfolio and has used the proceeds to pay
down the DCC Notes to a balance of $136 at December 31,
2007. In January 2008, DCC made a $90 payment to the forbearing
noteholders, consisting of $87 of principal and $3 of interest.
Contemporaneously with the execution of the Forbearance
Agreement, Dana and DCC executed a settlement agreement whereby
they agreed to the discontinuance of a tax sharing agreement
between them and to a stipulated amount of a general unsecured
claim owed by Prior Dana to DCC of $325 (the DCC Claim). On the
Effective Date and pursuant to the Plan, we paid DCC $49, the
remaining amount due to DCC noteholders, thereby settling
DCCs general unsecured claim of $325 against the Debtors.
DCC, in turn, used these funds to repay the noteholders in full.
Liabilities
Subject to Compromise
As required by
SOP 90-7,
liabilities being addressed through the bankruptcy process
(i.e., general unsecured nonpriority claims arising prior to the
Filing Date) are reported as liabilities subject to compromise
and adjusted to allowed claim amounts as determined through the
bankruptcy process, or to the estimated claim amount if
determined to be probable and estimable in accordance with
generally accepted accounting principles. As described in the
Claims Resolution section of this Note 3, certain of these
claims were resolved and satisfied on or before our emergence on
January 31, 2008, while others have been or will be
resolved subsequent to emergence. Although the allowed amount of
certain unresolved claims has not been determined, our liability
associated with these unresolved claims subject to compromise
has been discharged upon our emergence in exchange for the
treatment outlined in the Plan. Except for certain specific
claims, most of the general unsecured claims will be satisfied
by distributions from the previously funded reserve holding
shares of Dana common stock. As such, the future resolution of
claims subject to the reserve will not have an impact on our
post-emergence results of operations or financial condition.
Dana believes that the entire amount of reported liabilities
subject to compromise at December 31, 2007 was effectively
resolved at January 31, 2008 as disclosed in the unaudited
pro forma adjustments in Note 23.
78
The unresolved claims relate primarily to matters such as
contract disputes, litigation and environmental remediation and
related costs. The amounts reported as liabilities subject to
compromise for these claims are, in most cases, significantly
lower than the amount claimed based on the Debtors
assessment of the probable and estimable liabilities. Since
receipt of the filed claims, the Debtors have been actively
evaluating the merits of the claims and obtaining additional
information to ascertain their validity. The Reorganized Debtors
are in settlement discussions with many of the remaining
claimants and are seeking to reach agreement as to the allowed
claim amounts. Agreements to settle these claims could be for
amounts in excess of the liability currently recorded. Where
settlement outcomes subsequent to December 31, 2007 have
been finalized, or an estimable outcome has been determined to
be probable, the amounts reported as liabilities subject to
compromise at December 31, 2007 were adjusted to the
probable allowed amount of the claim resulting from the
settlement. Claims which have not been resolved as of the
present date, do not meet the probable and estimable standards
for recognition in the financial statements.
Liabilities subject to compromise in the consolidated balance
sheet include the amounts related to our discontinued operations
and consisted of the following at December 31, 2007 and
2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2007
|
|
|
2006
|
|
|
Accounts payable
|
|
$
|
285
|
|
|
$
|
290
|
|
Pension and other postretirement obligations
|
|
|
1,034
|
|
|
|
1,687
|
|
Debt (including accrued interest of $39)
|
|
|
1,621
|
|
|
|
1,623
|
|
Other
|
|
|
571
|
|
|
|
575
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consolidated liabilities subject to compromise
|
|
|
3,511
|
|
|
|
4,175
|
|
Payables to non-Debtor subsidiaries
|
|
|
402
|
|
|
|
402
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Debtor liabilities subject to compromise
|
|
$
|
3,913
|
|
|
$
|
4,577
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Upon emergence, the Plan required that certain liabilities
previously reported as liabilities subject to compromise be
retained by Dana. Approximately $213 of liabilities, including
$145 of asbestos liabilities, $27 of pension liabilities and $41
of other liabilities were reclassified from liabilities subject
to compromise to current or long-term liabilities of Dana, as
appropriate. In addition to this reduction for liabilities being
retained, liabilities subject to compromise were reduced through
claim settlements and adjustments to allowed amounts as
determined through the bankruptcy process, principally the
pension, postretirement and long-term disability actions
described below. These reductions were partially offset by the
inclusion of the contract rejection claims that gave rise to
allowed claims as discussed below and the settlement of claims
pursuant to the disputed claim resolution process discussed
above.
As discussed in Note 14, the reduction in pension and
postretirement obligations since the end of 2006 is attributed
to the elimination of postretirement healthcare benefits for
non-union employees and retirees and the freezing of service and
benefit accruals for non-union employees and benefit payments.
Based on the Bankruptcy Courts determination of allowed
long-term disability claims during the fourth quarter of 2007,
we reduced the recorded amount of long-term disability
liabilities subject to compromise by $56.
79
Debtors pre-petition bond debt of $1,621 is included in
liabilities subject to compromise. As of the Filing Date, we
discontinued recording interest expense on debt classified as
liabilities subject to compromise. On a consolidated basis,
contractual interest on all debt, including the portion
classified as liabilities subject to compromise, amounted to
$213 and $204 for the years ended December 31, 2007 and
2006.
Other includes accrued liabilities for environmental, product
liabilities, income taxes, deferred compensation, other
postemployment benefits and contract rejection claims. During
2007, there were two notable settlement agreements that resulted
in the recognition of allowed claims in liabilities subject to
compromise. In August 2007, we entered into a new long-term
supply agreement with Sypris, and Sypris received a general,
unsecured nonpriority claim of $90 for damages in connection
with cancellation of the old supply agreement. At emergence,
this claim was satisfied pursuant to the terms of the Plan. The
portion of the claim attributable to price reductions on future
products to be acquired from Sypris was estimated at $35 and was
recorded as a deferred asset in investments and other assets.
The remaining contract claim of $55 attributable to the economic
effects of other modifications to the Sypris contract (primarily
to exclude certain products) was recorded as a charge to
reorganization items in the third quarter of 2007.
Additionally, in August 2007, the Bankruptcy Court approved a
settlement agreement relating to our lease of an engineering and
office facility from the Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority (the
Port Authority). Under the terms of the settlement agreement, in
exchange for modifying the terms of the existing lease, the Port
Authority received a secured claim of $19 and a general
unsecured nonpriority claim of $15 under the Plan. The secured
claim of $19 was satisfied in January 2008 by execution of an
amended lease substantially in the form agreed to by the parties
and included in the Bankruptcy Courts settlement order.
This settlement was recognized as a lease modification. The
unsecured claim of $15 has been recorded as prepaid rent in
investments and other assets, with liabilities subject to
compromise increasing by a like amount at December 31,
2007. Since the prices under the new supply agreement with
Sypris and the rental payments under the amended lease with the
Port Authority have been determined to be at prevailing market
rates, the deferred assets recognized in connection with the
above settlement actions were eliminated and charged to
reorganization items, net as part of the application of fresh
start accounting on February 1, 2008.
As described in the Environmental Liabilities section of
Note 18, based on the probable outcome of certain
unresolved environmental claim negotiations, we recognized
reorganization expense in 2007 and increased liabilities subject
to compromise by $119.
Liabilities subject to compromise at December 31, 2007
includes $117 to record probable settlements of disputed claims
based on discussions subsequent to December 31, 2007.
Payables to non-Debtor subsidiaries include the DCC Claim of
$325.
80
Reorganization
Items
Professional advisory fees and other costs directly associated
with our reorganization are reported separately as
reorganization items pursuant to
SOP 90-7.
Professional fees include underwriting fees paid in connection
with the DIP Credit Agreement and other financings undertaken as
part of the reorganization process. Reorganization items also
include provisions and adjustments to reflect the carrying value
of certain pre-petition liabilities at their estimated allowable
claim amounts, as well as the costs incurred by the non-Debtor
companies as a result of the Debtors bankruptcy
proceedings.
The reorganization items in the consolidated statement of
operations for years ended December 31, 2007 and 2006
consisted of the following items: