Weyerhaeuser Company 10-Q 2005
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
For the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, or
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number 1-4825
Federal Way, Washington 98063-9777
Telephone (253) 924-2345
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
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 x No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes x No ¨
The number of shares outstanding of the registrants class of common stock, as of July 29, 2005, was 242,905,168 common shares ($1.25 par value).
WEYERHAEUSER COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES
For the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005
The financial information included in this report has been prepared in conformity with accounting practices and methods reflected in the financial statements included in the annual report (Form 10-K) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended December 26, 2004. Though not audited by an independent registered public accounting firm, the financial information reflects, in the opinion of management, all adjustments necessary to present a fair statement of results for the interim periods indicated. The results of operations for the twenty-six week period ended June 26, 2005, should not be regarded as necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the full year.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereto duly authorized.
August 4, 2005
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF EARNINGS
For the periods ended June 26, 2005 and June 27, 2004
(Dollar amounts in millions except per-share data)
See Accompanying Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET
June 26, 2005 and December 26, 2004
(Dollar amounts in millions)
See Accompanying Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
For the twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005 and June 27, 2004
(Dollar amounts in millions)
See Accompanying Notes To Consolidated Financial Statements.
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
For the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005 and June 27, 2004
Note 1: Basis of Presentation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Weyerhaeuser Company and all of its majority-owned domestic and foreign subsidiaries, and variable interest entities of which Weyerhaeuser Company or its subsidiaries are determined to be the primary beneficiary. Intercompany transactions and accounts are eliminated. Investments in and advances to unconsolidated equity affiliates over which the company has significant influence are accounted for using the equity method with taxes provided on undistributed earnings.
Certain of the consolidated financial statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements are presented in two groupings: (1) Weyerhaeuser, principally engaged in the growing and harvesting of timber and the manufacture, distribution and sale of forest products, and (2) Real Estate and Related Assets, principally engaged in real estate development and construction and other real estate related activities. The term company refers to Weyerhaeuser Company, all of its majority-owned domestic and foreign subsidiaries and variable interest entities of which Weyerhaeuser Company or its subsidiaries are determined to be the primary beneficiary. The term Weyerhaeuser refers to the forest products-based operations and excludes the Real Estate and Related Assets operations.
The consolidated financial statements are unaudited; however, the consolidated financial statements reflect all adjustments that are, in the opinion of management, necessary to a fair presentation of the companys financial position, results of operations, and cash flows for the interim periods presented. Except as disclosed in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, such adjustments are of a normal, recurring nature. The consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission pertaining to interim financial statements. Certain disclosures normally provided in financial statements prepared under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States have been omitted in accordance with those rules and regulations. These consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements included in the companys Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 26, 2004.
Certain reclassifications have been made to conform comparative data to the current format.
Note 2: New Accounting Pronouncements
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123 (revised 2004), Share-Based Payment (Statement 123R), in December 2004. Statement 123R is a revision of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation, and supersedes Accounting Principles Board (APB) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees. Statement 123R requires the fair value of employee awards issued, modified, repurchased or cancelled after implementation under share-based payment arrangements to be measured as of the grant dates. The resulting cost will then be recognized in the statement of earnings over the service period. The company will implement Statement 123R as of the beginning of fiscal year 2006, as permitted by a Securities and Exchange Commission Rule that was issued in April 2005. The company is not able to estimate at this time the effect that Statement 123R will have on its financial position, results of operations or cash flows when Statement 123R is adopted.
The FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 151, Inventory CostsAn Amendment of ARB No. 43, Chapter 4 (Statement 151), in November 2004. Statement 151 amends the guidance in Accounting Research Bulletin (ARB) No. 43, Chapter 4, Inventory Pricing, to clarify the accounting for abnormal amounts of idle facility expense, freight, handling costs, and wasted material (spoilage). Among other provisions, the new rule requires that items such as idle facility expense, excessive spoilage, double freight, and rehandling costs be recognized as current-period charges regardless of whether they meet the criterion of so abnormal as stated in ARB No. 43. Additionally, Statement 151 requires that the allocation of fixed production overheads to the costs of conversions be based on normal capacity of the production facilities. Statement 151 is effective for fiscal years beginning after June 15, 2005, and is required to be adopted by the company in the first quarter of fiscal 2006. The company is currently evaluating the effect that the adoption of Statement 151 will have on its financial position and results of operations, but does not expect it to be material.
The FASB issued Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 153, Exchanges of Nonmonetary AssetsAn Amendment of APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions (Statement 153), in December 2004. Statement 153 eliminates the exception from fair value measurement for nonmonetary exchanges of similar productive assets in paragraph 21(b) of APB Opinion No. 29, Accounting for Nonmonetary Transactions, and replaces it with an exception for exchanges that do not have commercial substance. Statement 153 specifies that a nonmonetary exchange has commercial substance if the future cash flows of the entity are expected to change significantly as a result of the exchange. Statement 153 is effective for nonmonetary asset exchanges occurring in fiscal periods beginning after June 15, 2005, and is required to be adopted by the company in the third quarter of fiscal 2005. The company is currently evaluating the effect that the adoption of Statement 153 will have on its financial position and results of operations, but does not expect it to be material.
The FASB issued Interpretation No. 47, Accounting for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations (Interpretation 47), in March 2005. Interpretation 47 clarifies that a liability must be recognized for a legal obligation to perform an asset retirement activity when the timing or method of settlement are conditional on future events that may or may not be within the control of the company if the fair value of the liability can be reasonably estimated. Interpretation 47 also clarifies when sufficient information to reasonably estimate the fair value of an asset retirement obligation exists. The company is required to adopt Interpretation 47 by the end of 2005. The company is not able to estimate the effect that adoption of Interpretation 47 will have on its financial position or results of operations.
Note 3: Stock-Based Employee Compensation
The company continues to apply the intrinsic-value method for stock-based compensation to employees prescribed by APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations.
As described in Prospective Accounting Pronouncements, APB Opinion No. 25 will be superseded by Statement 123R effective as of the beginning of fiscal year 2006. Employee awards issued, modified, repurchased or cancelled after implementation of Statement 123R under share-based payment arrangements will be measured at fair value as of the grant dates and the resulting cost will be recognized in the statement of earnings over the service period.
The following table illustrates the effect on net earnings and net earnings per share as if the company had applied the fair-value-recognition provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation (Statement 123), to stock-based employee compensation. The company has consistently defined the past year as the service period for purposes of applying the fair value recognition provisions of Statement 123. As a result, stock-based employee compensation expense is reflected as of the option grant dates in the following table.
Stock Option Exercise and Share Repurchase Program
On April 13, 2004, the company instituted a program to purchase shares from a limited number of employees who had been limited in their ability to sell shares issuable upon exercise of their stock options as a result of trading restrictions the company imposed on such employees. Under this program, the option holders were permitted to effect a cashless exercise of their stock options followed by an immediate sale to the company of the common shares issued on such cashless exercise, so that there would be no market transaction in connection with such exercises. Only those options granted to 21 participating employees on or prior to April 19, 1999, (representing options to purchase 578,486 common shares) were eligible to be exercised under the program. The program resulted in variable accounting treatment for the stock options included in the program through the programs expiration. The program expired on April 1, 2005.
Note 4: Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans
The company recognized net pension and other postretirement benefit expense of $38 million and $88 million in the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, respectively, and $51 million and $92 million in the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004, respectively. The components of net periodic benefit costs are:
The company is not required to make any contributions to its U.S. pension plans during 2005. The company contributed $22 million to its Canadian pension plans in the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005 and expects to contribute a total of approximately $42 million to its Canadian pension plans in 2005.
Qualified and Registered Pension Plan Investments
The strategy of the U.S. pension trust is to invest directly and via total return partnership swaps in a diversified mix of nontraditional strategies, including hedge funds, private equity, opportunistic real estate and other externally managed alternative investment funds. Various derivatives, such as S&P 500 swaps and fixed income futures, are used to supplement the market exposures embedded in such investments. The derivatives constitute indirect investments held by the U.S. pension trust that serve to increase the return and risk profile of the investment portfolio. The overall return earned by the pension trust is the aggregate of returns earned on direct investments and returns earned on the derivatives. The Canadian pension trust has a similar investment strategy. However, it concentrates direct investments into cash and cash equivalents while gaining return exposures through derivatives. The company has not established target allocations for the direct investment portfolio or the derivatives.
The qualified and registered plans are exposed to the risk of nonperformance by counterparties to the indirect investments but the company does not expect any counterparties to fail to meet their obligations. However, since there are no exchanges of principal on the indirect investments, only the amount of unsettled net receivables is at risk. The company manages this risk through selection of counterparties with a defined minimum credit quality, diversification, settlement provisions and properly documented agreements. Investments in hedge funds and private partnerships are controlled through selection and diversification of managers and strategies and use of limited liability vehicles. Portfolio risk is managed through diversification and by constraining the risk profile of the portfolio within defined boundaries.
The allocation of assets by category for the qualified and registered plans as of December 26, 2004, and December 28, 2003, including the fair value of derivatives, is as follows:
The approximate fair value of derivatives held by the qualified and registered plans as of December 26, 2004, and December 28, 2003, is as follows:
The total approximate notional amount of derivatives held by the qualified and registered plans as of December 26, 2004, and December 28, 2003, is as follows:
The expected return on plan assets assumption reflects the companys best estimate regarding the long-term expected return on the U.S. portfolio. The expected return assumption is based on historical fund returns. The Canadian funds investment strategy has mirrored that of the U.S. plan since 1998. Over the period of 20 years during which this investment strategy has been pursued, the U.S. fund has achieved a net compound annual return of 17.4 percent. The determination of the expected return on plan assets assumption requires a high degree of judgment and places weight on more recent pension plan asset performance. The expected return on plan assets assumption as of December 26, 2004, is:
Actual Return on Plan Assets
The composition of the actual return on plan assets in each of the years in the three-year period ended December 26, 2004, is as follows:
Note 5: Net Earnings Per Share
Basic net earnings per share are based on the weighted average number of common and exchangeable shares outstanding during the respective periods. Diluted net earnings per share are based on the weighted average number of common and exchangeable shares outstanding and stock options outstanding at the beginning of or granted during the respective periods, calculated using the treasury method.
Options to purchase 4,500 shares as of June 26, 2005, and 157,900 shares as of June 27, 2004, were not included in the computation of diluted earnings per share for both the thirteen and twenty-six week periods then ended, because the option exercise prices were greater than the average market price of the companys common shares during those periods.
Due to the differences in basic and diluted weighted average shares outstanding for the thirteen-week periods ended June 26, 2005, and June 27, 2004, as compared to the twenty-six week periods then ended, earnings per share for the year-to-date 2005 and 2004 periods may not equal the sum of the respective earnings per share for the first and second quarters of 2005 and 2004.
Note 6: Comprehensive Income
The companys comprehensive income is as follows:
During the first quarter of 2005, the company entered into foreign exchange contracts in connection with an agreement to sell its British Columbia Coastal Group (B.C. Coastal) operations. To the extent applicable, the foreign exchange contracts were designated as a hedge of the companys net investment in B.C. Coastal. Upon the sale of the companys B.C. Coastal operations on May 30, 2005, the gain related to this hedge was reclassified into earnings as part of the gain on the sale of the B.C. Coastal operations. See Note 18: Discontinued Operations. As of May 30, 2005, the company redesignated the entire amount of the foreign exchange contracts as a hedge of the companys net investment in Weyerhaeuser Company Limited, the subsidiary that held the B.C. Coastal operations. As of June 26, 2005, the notional value of the foreign exchange contracts was $1.1 billion (Canadian), or approximately $892 million (U.S.), and the fair value of these contracts was a loss of approximately $1 million (U.S.). As of June 26, 2005, cumulative other comprehensive income includes approximately $15 million of loss related to changes in the fair value of this hedge since the date of redesignation.
The effects of the Canadian foreign exchange contracts on the accompanying consolidated financial statements are as follows:
Note 7: Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities
The company adopted the provisions of FASB Interpretation No. 46 (revised December 2003), Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (Interpretation 46R), as of March 28, 2004. Interpretation 46R addresses consolidation of certain entities in which equity investors do not have the characteristics of a controlling financial interest or do not have sufficient equity at risk for the entity to finance its activities without additional subordinated financial support from other parties.
During 2002 through 2004, the company closed several significant sales of nonstrategic timberlands. Beginning with the financial statements included in the companys Form 10-K for the year ended December 26, 2004, the company consolidated the assets and liabilities of the buyer-sponsored special purpose entities and the monetization special purpose entities (collectively the SPEs) involved in these transactions as the result of an interpretation of Interpretation 46R. However, because the SPEs are separate and distinct legal entities from the company, the assets of the SPEs are not available to satisfy the liabilities and obligations of the company and the liabilities of the SPEs are not liabilities or obligations of the company. Deferred gains on the sales of nonstrategic timberlands of $59 million as of December 26, 2004, were included in Liabilities (nonrecourse to Weyerhaeuser) held by special purpose entities on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet. During the second quarter of 2005, following a final determination regarding the interpretation of Interpretation 46R, the balance of these deferred gains was recognized in income, resulting in a $57 million pretax gain on previous timberlands sales.
Sales proceeds paid to buyer-sponsored SPEs are invested in restricted bank financial instruments of $909 million as of both June 26, 2005, and December 26, 2004. The monetization SPEs had long-term debt of $756 million as of June 26, 2005, and December 26, 2004. The monetization SPEs are exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by the banks, but the company does not expect the banks to fail to meet their obligations.
The companys real estate development subsidiaries enter into options to acquire lots at fixed prices in the ordinary course of business, primarily for the purpose of building single-family homes. In addition, a subsidiary in the Real Estate and Related Assets segment provides subordinated financing to third-party developers and homebuilders. Both fixed-price purchase options and subordinated financing constitute variable interests under Interpretation 46R. The companys real estate subsidiaries have consolidated three entities under Interpretation 46R, with estimated assets and liabilities of $22 million as of June 26, 2005, and $45 million as of December 26, 2004. As of June 26, 2005, the companys real estate development subsidiaries have 8 lot option purchase agreements entered into prior to December 31, 2003, with deposits of approximately $4 million at risk. After exhaustive efforts, the company has not been able to obtain the information necessary to determine whether or not it is required to consolidate any of these entities under Interpretation 46R. The total amount that would be paid under these purchase options, if fully exercised, is approximately $73 million. In addition, as of June 26, 2005, the companys real estate development subsidiaries have 17 lot option purchase agreements with entities created after December 30, 2003, with deposits of approximately $18 million at risk, where the company is not the primary beneficiary and is not required to consolidate the entities. The total amount that would be paid under these option purchase agreements, if fully exercised, is approximately $272 million. One of the companys real estate subsidiaries has approximately $11 million in subordinated loans at risk at June 26, 2005, in 34 variable interest entities.
Note 8: Equity Affiliates
Investments in unconsolidated equity affiliates over which the company has significant influence are accounted for using the equity method with taxes provided on undistributed earnings.
Weyerhaeusers significant equity affiliates as of June 26, 2005, are:
Unconsolidated financial information for affiliated companies, which are accounted for on the equity method, follows. Unconsolidated net sales and revenues, operating income and net income include the results of SCA Weyerhaeuser Packaging Holding Company Asia Ltd. for the periods prior to June 2004, when the company sold its interest in the joint venture.
Weyerhaeuser provides goods and services to these affiliates, which vary by entity, in the form of raw materials, management and marketing services, support services and shipping services. Additionally, Weyerhaeuser purchases finished product from certain of these entities. The aggregate total of these transactions is not material to Weyerhaeusers results of operations.
Real Estate and Related Assets
Unconsolidated financial information for entities that are accounted for by the equity method follows:
Note 9: Goodwill
The changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, are as follows:
Goodwill associated with the companys B.C. Coastal operations was included in the carrying value of the net assets of B.C. Coastal and was written off in connection with the B.C. Coastal sale which occurred during the second quarter of 2005. See Note 18: Discontinued Operations. The balance of this goodwill as of December 26, 2004, was classified as assets of business held for sale in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet and is not included in the rollforward above. Both the Timberlands and Wood Products segments had goodwill associated with the B.C. Coastal operations.
Note 10: Inventories
Note 11: Accrued Liabilities
Note 12: Debt
During the second quarter of 2004, Weyerhaeuser recognized a pretax charge of $21 million in connection with the early extinguishment of debt. This charge is classified as interest expense incurred on the Consolidated Statement of Earnings.
Weyerhaeuser Company had a short-term bank credit line of $1.2 billion under a 364-day revolving facility at December 26, 2004. The 364-day revolving line of credit expired in March 2005.
In March 2005, Weyerhaeuser Company and Weyerhaeuser Real Estate Company (WRECO) entered into a $1.2 billion 5-year revolving credit facility to replace the 364-day revolving credit facility that expired. The new 5-year facility expires March 2010. WRECO can borrow up to $400 million under this facility. Neither Weyerhaeuser Company nor WRECO is a guarantor of the borrowings of the other under this facility.
In addition, Weyerhaeuser Company has a revolving credit facility agreement entered into with a group of banks that expires in March 2007 and that provides for borrowings up to a total amount of $1.3 billion, all of which is available to Weyerhaeuser Company. Borrowings are at LIBOR plus a spread or other such interest rates mutually agreed to between the borrower and lending banks.
In April 2005, in conjunction with an appeal bond posted in the Paragon litigation (see Note 13: Legal Proceedings, Commitments and Contingencies), the company obtained $500 million in letters of credit against the March 2010 credit facility. Of the total committed bank facilities of $2.5 billion, $2.0 billion was available as of June 26, 2005, for incremental borrowings.
Note 13: Legal Proceedings, Commitments and Contingencies
Hardboard Siding Claims The company announced in June 2000 it had entered into a proposed nationwide settlement of its hardboard siding class action cases and, as a result, took a charge of $130 million before taxes to cover the estimated cost of the settlement and related claims. The settlement was approved in December 2000, and is binding on all parties. In the third quarter of 2001, the company reassessed the adequacy of the reserve and increased the reserve by an additional $43 million. In the third quarter of 2004, an adjustment was made to reduce the reserve by $20 million based upon a review of the activities and trends over the preceding four years. At the end of the second quarter of 2005, the company had approximately $54 million in reserves remaining for hardboard siding claims. While the company believes that the reserve balances established for these matters are adequate, the company is unable to estimate at this time the amount of additional charges, if any, that may be required for these matters in the future.
The settlement class consists of all persons who own or owned structures in the United States on which the companys hardboard siding had been installed from January 1, 1981, through December 31, 1999. This is a claims-based settlement, which means that the claims will be paid as submitted over a nine-year period. An independent adjuster will review each claim submitted and determine whether it qualifies for payment under the terms of the settlement agreement.
The following table presents an analysis of the claims activity related to the hardboard siding class action cases:
The lower average damage award paid in 2004 was due primarily to a lower number of awards for multi-family structures in 2004 than in 2003 or 2005.
The company has received $52 million in recoveries from its insurance carriers by way of negotiated settlements.
The company currently has no litigation pending with any person or entity that has opted out of the settlement. Individuals and entities that have opted out of the settlement may file lawsuits against the company in the future.
Linerboard Antitrust Litigation In May 1999, two civil antitrust lawsuits were filed against the company in U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Both suits named as defendants several other major containerboard and packaging producers. The complaint in the first case alleged the defendants conspired to fix the price of linerboard and that the alleged conspiracy had the effect of increasing the price of corrugated containers. The suit requested class certification for purchasers of corrugated containers during the period from October 1993 through November 1995. The complaint in the second case alleged that the company conspired to manipulate the price of linerboard and thereby the price of corrugated sheets. The suit requested class certification for purchasers of corrugated sheets during the period from October 1993 through November 1995. In September 2001, the district court certified both classes. In September 2003, the company, Georgia-Pacific and International Paper requested preliminary approval of a $68 million settlement of the class action litigation. The company recognized a pretax charge of $23 million in the third quarter of 2003, representing the companys portion of the settlement. Final approval of the settlement occurred in December 2003. Approximately 165 members of the classes opted out of the class and filed thirteen lawsuits against the company and other producers. In the fourth quarter of 2004, Weyerhaeuser settled one of the opt-out claims for $165,000. In April 2005, the company settled a second opt-out claim and recognized a pretax charge of $12 million in the first quarter of 2005. It was the only opt-out lawsuit set for trial. In most of the cases the plaintiffs are seeking both state and federal antitrust remedies. It is possible that additional class members that opted out may file lawsuits against the company in the future. The company has not recorded a reserve for the remaining opt-out cases and is unable to estimate at this time the amount of charges, if any, that may be required for this matter in the future.
In March 2004, La Cie McCormick Canada Company filed a class action lawsuit in Superior Court of Justice, in Ontario, Canada against the company and other linerboard manufacturers on behalf of all Canadians who purchased corrugated products, including sheets and containers and/or linerboard, during the period of time from 1993 and continuing until at least the end of 1995. The allegations in this matter mirror the allegations in the U.S. cases. Relief is sought under various theories for $25 million in general damages and $10 million in punitive damages. At this stage, the company cannot calculate what portion of the damages requested would be argued as the companys responsibility. Canadian law does not provide for a trebling of antitrust damages. The company has not recorded a reserve for the matter, and does not expect any future charges that may be taken for this matter to have a material adverse effect on the companys results of operations, cash flows or financial position.
Alder Antitrust Litigation In December 2000, a lawsuit was filed against the company in U.S. District Court in Oregon (the Initial Alder Case) alleging that from 1996 to the present, the company had monopoly power or attempted to gain monopoly power in the Pacific Northwest market for alder logs and finished alder lumber. In April 2003, the jury returned a verdict in favor of one of the plaintiffs in the amount of $26 million, which was automatically trebled to $79 million under the antitrust laws. The company appealed the matter to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In May 2005 the Ninth Circuit upheld the jury decision. The company plans to ask for discretionary review by the U.S. Supreme Court. In January 2005, the company received a copy of a complaint in equity filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon to set aside the judgment in the Initial Alder Case on behalf of a plaintiff who did not prevail in the jury trial held in April 2003. The plaintiff alleges a fraud
was committed on the court during the initial trial and argues that as a result the judgment against the plaintiff should be vacated and a new trial set on plaintiffs claim of monopolization of the alder sawlog market. The complaint alleges damages after trebling of $20 million. The company denies the allegations in the complaint and is actively defending the matter.
In April 2003, two separate lawsuits were filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon alleging that the company violated antitrust laws by monopolizing the markets for alder sawlogs and finished alder lumber. The first suit (the Westwood case) was settled in March 2004, for approximately $35 million. The second suit was brought by Coast Mountain Hardwoods, Inc., a Canadian company that sold its assets to the company in 2000. In April 2004, the company announced a settlement of the Coast Mountain case for $14 million.
In June 2003, an alder antitrust complaint was filed in U.S. District Court in Oregon by Washington Alder, an alder sawmill located in Washington. The complaint alleged monopolization of the alder log and lumber markets from 1998 to the present and sought damages, after trebling, of $32 million, which was increased to $36 million in March 2004, and divestiture of the companys Northwest Hardwoods Division and alder sawmills in Oregon, Washington and British Columbia. In May 2004, a jury awarded damages, after trebling, of $16 million for the period for which the judge had determined there was issue preclusion as a result of the Initial Alder Case, but found no monopolization or attempted monopolization for the period for which issue preclusion did not apply. The company believes that the finding of issue preclusion was incorrect as a matter of law and that a number of significant legal errors were made by the trial court. The companys motion for judgment as a matter of law was denied in July 2004. The company filed an appeal with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and is awaiting a date for oral argument.
In July 2004, a lawsuit was filed against the company by five hardwood mill owners in U.S. District Court in Oregon and was assigned to the same judge who has heard the other alder matters. The plaintiffs made the same allegations as the other alder complaints but added a new species, maple. The maple allegations were dismissed in the first quarter of 2005. The plaintiffs originally sought trebled damages of $56 million, including $4 million related to maple sawlogs, and their complaint included a request that the judge enjoin some of the companys business practices. Thereafter, a first amended complaint was filed which lowered the damage demand to trebled damages of $53 million, including $4 million related to maple sawlogs. In April 2005, a second amended complaint was filed requesting trebled damages related to the alder allegations of $53 million. The lawsuit continues to request the judge enjoin many of the companys key hardwoods business practices and divestment of a part of the companys hardwood business. In May 2005, the company settled claims by three of the plaintiffs for a total of $2 million. A trial involving the two remaining plaintiffs has been set for November 1, 2005. The court has applied issue preclusion based upon the Initial Alder Case so the jury will be instructed that it has already been established that the company engaged in unspecified anti-competitive conduct. Whether issue preclusion should be applied in this circumstance is an issue that is before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in the Washington Alder case.
On April 29, 2004, a civil antitrust lawsuit was filed against the company in U.S. District Court in Oregon. The complaint alleged that as a result of the companys alleged monopolization of the alder sawlog market in the Pacific Northwest as determined in the Initial Alder Case the company monopolized the market for finished alder lumber in the Pacific Northwest and, as a consequence, has been able to charge monopoly prices for finished alder lumber. The lawsuit requested class certification primarily for businesses that purchased finished alder lumber produced by the company from 2000 to the present. The original complaint alleged that the purported class may have realized over $100 million in direct damages, and sought direct and treble damages under the antitrust laws in an amount to be determined at trial. The lawsuit also requested injunctive relief to ensure the availability of alder sawlogs for sawmills competing with the company, which could include termination of certain of the companys contracts to purchase alder logs or the companys control over certain timberlands. The lawsuit was assigned to the same judge who presided over the other alder cases. In August 2004, the court dismissed the finished alder allegations with leave to refile and reserved ruling on whether the sawlog allegations should be dismissed. On August 30, 2004, plaintiffs filed a first amended complaint which again asserted monopolization of the alder finished lumber market and expanded the claimed market from the Pacific Northwest to the entire U.S. but deleted the allegations dealing with alder sawlogs. The amended complaint did not specify the amount of damages sought, but asked that the company be enjoined from certain business practices. The company received a revised plaintiffs expert report which calculated damages, after trebling, at $59 million. In December 2004, the Judge issued an order certifying plaintiff as a class representative for all U.S. purchasers of finished alder lumber between April 28, 2000, and March 31, 2004, for purposes of awarding monetary damages. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied the companys request that it review the certification of the class. The company disagrees with the allegations in the lawsuit and is vigorously defending the case. The plaintiffs in the Initial Alder Case also claimed that the company had monopolized the finished alder lumber market in the Pacific Northwest, but the jury found in favor of the company on this claim and that finding was not appealed. The claim of attempted monopolization of the finished alder lumber market was also made in the Washington Alder litigation, but was abandoned by plaintiff during trial. In December 2004, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit refused to stay the matter pending a decision on the Initial Alder Case. In January 2005, the trial judge ruled against class plaintiffs attempt at precluding the company from disputing anticompetitive acts. In January 2005, the company filed a motion for summary judgment, which was
argued in the second quarter. No ruling has been issued. In February 2005, class counsel notified the court that approximately 5 percent of the class members opted out of the class action lawsuit. The company has no litigation pending with any entity that has opted out of the class, but it is possible that entities who have opted out may file lawsuits against the company in the future. Trial is scheduled for October 18, 2005.
Changes in the amount accrued for alder antitrust litigation matters follows:
While the company believes the reserve established for the alder antitrust litigation is adequate, because of the uncertainties surrounding the litigation process, it is unable to estimate what additional charges, if any, may be required in the future.
Paragon Trade Brands, Inc. Litigation In May 1999, the Equity Committee (Committee) in the Paragon Trade Brands, Inc. (Paragon), bankruptcy proceeding filed a motion in U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Northern District of Georgia for authority to prosecute claims against the company in the name of the debtors estate. Specifically, the Committee asserted that the company breached certain warranties in agreements entered into between Paragon and the company in connection with Paragons public offering of common stock in February 1993. The Committee seeks to recover damages sustained by Paragon as a result of two patent infringement cases, one brought by Procter & Gamble and the other by Kimberly-Clark. In September 1999, the court authorized the Committee to commence an adversary proceeding against the company. The Committee commenced this proceeding in October 1999. Pursuant to a reorganization of Paragon, the litigation claims representative for the bankruptcy estate became the plaintiff in the proceeding. In June 2002, the Bankruptcy Court issued an oral opinion granting the plaintiffs motion for partial summary judgment, holding the company liable to plaintiff for breaches of warranty and denying the companys motion for summary judgment. In October 2002, the Bankruptcy Court issued a written order confirming the June oral opinion. The damages phase of the case began on October 30, 2003, and was concluded on December 16, 2003. In April 2005 the Bankruptcy Court imposed approximately $460 million in damages. The company has appealed the liability determination and the amount of damages to the U.S. District Court and has posted a bond of $500 million to cover the appeal. In June 2005 the Bankruptcy Court issued an amended order correcting a clerical mistake in the original judgment and revised the amount of damages to approximately $470 million. The company has not established a reserve for this matter because, based upon the information currently available to the company, including managements belief that an adverse result is not probable because the company will prevail on appeal, management does not believe the requirements of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies (Statement 5), for establishing a reserve in this matter have been met. However, there is no guarantee that management will not determine in the future that a charge for all or a portion of any damage award is required. Any such charge could materially and adversely affect the companys results of operations or financial condition for the quarter or the year in which such a charge may be recognized.
Other Litigation The company is a party to other matters generally incidental to its business in addition to the matters described above.
Summary Although the final outcome of any legal proceeding is subject to a great many variables and cannot be predicted with any degree of certainty, management currently believes that adequate reserves have been established for probable losses from litigation when the amounts could be reasonably determined. Management further believes that the ultimate outcome of these legal proceedings could materially adversely affect results of operations, cash flows or financial condition in any given quarter or year, but will not have a material adverse effect on the companys long-term results of operations, cash flows or financial position.
Countervailing and Anti-dumping Duties
Softwood Lumber Imported into the United States from Canada
In April 2001, the Coalition for Fair Lumber Imports (Coalition) filed two petitions with the U.S. Department of Commerce (Department) and the International Trade Commission (ITC), claiming that production of softwood lumber in Canada was being subsidized by Canada and that imports from Canada were being dumped into the U.S. market (sold at less than fair value). The Coalition asked that countervailing duty (CVD) and anti-dumping (AD) tariffs be imposed on softwood lumber imported from Canada.
In March 2002, the Department confirmed its preliminary finding that certain Canadian provinces were subsidizing logs by failing to collect full market price for stumpage. The Department established a final CVD rate of 18.79 percent. In the AD proceedings, the Department found that the six Canadian manufacturers examined, including the company, were engaged in sales at less than fair value and set cash deposit rates ranging from 2.18 percent to 12.44 percent. The companys deposit rate was set at 12.39 percent. Because of statutory limitations that affected timing, the bonds covering duties following the preliminary determinations were released by the United States. The resulting reversal of accrued expenses was included in earnings during 2002.
In May 2002, the ITC confirmed its earlier ruling that U.S. industry is threatened by subsidized and dumped imports and the company began making cash deposits relating to the CVD and AD actions. As a result of administrative determinations described below, effective for the first quarter of 2005, the combined CVD and AD rate charged on Weyerhaeuser shipments of Canadian softwood lumber into the United States was reduced from 31.18 percent to 24.36 percent. Since May 2002, the company has made cash deposits relating to the CVD and AD actions at a rate of approximately $20 million to $35 million a quarter. Through June 2005, the company has paid a cumulative total of $312 million in CVD and AD duties and $19 million in related costs on softwood lumber the company has imported into the United States from Canada.
The CVD and AD tariffs are currently under review and challenge in several forums. A summary of these proceedings relating to the CVD and AD tariffs follows:
Administrative Reviews In June 2003, the Department began the process of the annual review for the period May 22, 2002, through March 31, 2003, to determine the final duty rates under both CVD and AD for this time period. On June 2, 2004, the Department issued a preliminary decision for this period setting the companys AD rate at 8.35 percent and its CVD rate at 9.24 percent. These rates are lower than the initial deposit rates of 12.39 percent for AD and 18.79 percent for CVD. The decision included comments on potential changes to the calculation methodology, which could effectively increase the rates. On December 14, 2004, the Department, using, in part, a new cross border price comparison methodology, issued its final determination in the first administrative review. It set the companys CVD rate at 17.18 percent and AD rate at 8.70 percent. On January 14, 2005, the Department amended the AD rate downward to 7.99 percent. On February 17, 2005, the Department amended the final CVD rate downward to 16.37 percent. These are the rates the Department will instruct U.S. Customs to implement on entries of softwood lumber imported during the period from May 22, 2002, to March 31, 2003, and for duty deposits going forward. The determination is subject to appeal by both sides. On February 17, 2005, the company filed an appeal of the AD determination to the Court of International Trade (CIT). On the same date the Coalition appealed both the CVD and AD determinations to the CIT. Canada has also requested the formation of a NAFTA Panel to contest the CVD determination by the Department. The various actions filed in the CIT relating to the AD determination have been consolidated by court order. In addition on March 7, 2005, CIT granted an order enjoining the Department and U.S. Customs from liquidating or causing or permitting liquidation of the AD deposits covering the period of May 22, 2002, through April 30, 2003, the first administrative review.
The annual review process will be conducted covering successive one-year periods for five years. In 2007, both the CVD duty and AD orders will be automatically reviewed in a sunset proceeding to determine whether dumping will continue or a countervailing subsidy is likely to recur if the relevant order were to be revoked. In June 2004, the Department announced that it was commencing the second administrative review of the AD and CVD duties and orders for softwood lumber from Canada for the period from May 1, 2003, to April 30, 2004. The company has requested that the Department conduct administrative reviews of both the CVD and AD orders in this second administrative review. This action is required to protect the status of current deposits. On June 1, 2005 the Department announced its preliminary determinations of Weyerhaeusers rates of 8.18 percent for CVD and 4.74 percent for AD. The rates are
nonbinding until finalized. A final decision from the Department is scheduled for October, 2005. On June 30, 2005 the Department commenced the third administrative review covering the period May 1, 2004 to April 30, 2005.
NAFTA Appeals The Canadian Government, the company and other Canadian companies appealed the Departments 2002 AD and CVD determinations, and the ITCs 2002 injury determination in separate appeals under the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). Following is a summary of the status of these appeals.
AD Panel The panel convened to review the Departments AD findings ruled that the Department must change its methodology for computing an anti-dumping margin in an investigation when only some product sales are found to have been dumped and other sales are found to have been made at above a dumped price. The Departments current practice is called zeroing. On June 9, 2005 the NAFTA AD panel released its second remand decision ordering the Department to recalculate the original company specific margins without the use of zeroing. The Department was given 30 days to issue another AD remand determination and on July 12 the Department recalculated the final margins for the company for the investigation phase at 17.59 percent using methodology the department states is consistent with the Section 129 calculation described later in this section. This method of calculation and this determination will be appealed.
CVD Panel There have been a series of NAFTA CVD panel decisions that have resulted in the matter being sent back to the Department for re-determinations.
In June 2004, a second CVD panel decision concluded that the Departments calculations were seriously flawed and sent the matter back to the Department for recalculation to determine the level of subsidy. On July 30, 2004, the Department issued a second remand determination, which calculated a revised CVD rate of 7.82 percent. On December 1, 2004, the NAFTA panel again ordered the Department to reconsider its CVD computations and asked the Department to finish its work on the recalculations. The Department recalculated the CVD rate at 1.8 percent. This determination was again appealed to the NAFTA panel. On May 23, 2005 the NAFTA panel again remanded the case back to the Department and on July, 7, 2005 the Department issued a fourth remand determination calculating the CVD rate at 1.21 percent.
Injury Panel On September 1, 2004, the NAFTA Injury Panel ordered the ITC to reverse its earlier decision of injury and on September 11, 2004, the ITC agreed that the U.S. softwood lumber industry is not threatened with material injury by reason of softwood imports from Canada. By decision issued on October 12, 2004, the Panel affirmed the ITCs decision and the decision became final on October 25, 2004, when it was published by the NAFTA Secretariat.
NAFTA Extraordinary Challenges The final NAFTA decision on injury has been challenged by the U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) before a newly constituted panel called the Extraordinary Challenge Committee (ECC). An ECC consisting of 3 members (2 from Canada and 1 from the U.S.) has been announced. A hearing was held June 2 and 3, 2005, and a decision is expected in July or late August. A final decision on the CVD rate calculation may also be challenged before an ECC.
WTO Reviews With the support of provincial governments, the federal government of Canada also moved for reviews by dispute settlement panels under the World Trade Organization (WTO) and those reviews are now complete.
AD Review The WTO AD panel upheld the Departments finding that there was dumping. Also, on August 11, 2004, the WTO Appellate Body held that the practice of using zeroing to calculate export prices to justify its AD duties during the investigation process was improper.
CVD Review In January 2004, the WTO Appellate Body issued a decision in the CVD case, which approved the use of cross-border comparisons as a benchmark in certain limited circumstances. The WTO also found that stumpage fees could be considered a subsidy.
Injury In March 2004, a WTO panel announced its final ruling on injury, faulting a U.S. ITC finding of a threat of injury resulting from dumped and subsidized imports of softwood lumber from Canada.
Byrd Amendment The WTO appeals body has affirmed a panel ruling against the United States that the so-called Byrd Amendment, which provides for the distribution of AD and CVD duties to petitioners, is inconsistent with U.S. international obligations. On September 1, 2004, the WTO gave Canada and other countries the right to impose trade sanctions on the United States in retaliation for collecting such duties and making them available for distribution under the Byrd Amendment. On March 31, 2005, Canada announced a retaliation surtax commencing May 1, 2005, of 15 percent against certain U.S. goods exported to Canada. The aggregate amount of this surtax is approximately $14 million (Canadian). The U.S. Administration has signaled that it will introduce legislation to repeal the Byrd Amendment, but the timing and prospects for such legislation are unclear.
USTR Section 129 Process In June 2004, pursuant to U.S. law, the USTR asked the ITC to provide an advisory report as to whether it can implement the WTOs decision against the ITC on threat of injury. In July 2004, the USTR also asked the ITC to issue a new decision on threat of injury to bring the United States into compliance with the WTO decision finding against the ITC on injury. Section 129 of the Uruguay Round Agreements Act provides the basic provisions through which the U.S. implements new AD and CVD determinations to make them consistent with an adverse WTO report. The ITC formally began the Section 129 review process in early August 2004. The company has answered questionnaires received in this new process. After a hearing by the ITC in October 2004, the ITC issued a new determination on November 24, 2004, reaffirming that imports of Canadian softwood lumber pose a threat of injury to U.S. industry. In January 2005 Canada requested that a NAFTA panel review this ITC decision on threat of injury. Canada has also sought authorization from WTO to impose $3.4 billion in sanctions on the U.S. for failure to revoke the CVD and AD deposits pursuant to the WTOs decision on injury. The U.S. is challenging the Canadian request before the WTO.
On November 9, 2004, the USTR also asked the Department to undertake a Section 129 process to comply with the WTO Appellate Body decision of February 14, 2004, that the Departments countervailing decision was contrary to the WTO Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures. The Department issued questionnaires and received briefs. On December 10, 2004, the Department issued a decision in which it calculated countervailing duties of 18.62 percent on softwood lumber imports. Canada has sought a compliance review at the WTO for the failure of the U.S. to fully implement the WTO CVD decision. A decision is expected later in the year. In addition Canada has filed a request for a NAFTA panel to review the Section 129 CVD decision.
On January 31, 2005, the Department issued a new determination under Section 129 for AD rates, increasing the companys rate to 16.1 percent as its method of complying with the WTOs determination that it should not use zeroing to determine the AD rates. The company has provided comments on the rates. Canada has also sought a compliance review at the WTO for the failure of the U.S. to fully implement the WTO AD decision on zeroing. A decision is expected later in the year.
The company intends to appeal all of the Section 129 determinations.
Potential Future Litigation Some parties involved in the softwood lumber dispute have indicated if the ruling on the Extraordinary Challenge goes against the United States, the constitutionality of NAFTA itself or of its dispute resolution mechanism may be challenged before a U.S. court.
Assessment of Loss Contingencies
The deposits made against the CVD and AD duties have been expensed. It is difficult to predict the net effect final duties will have on the company. In the event that final rates differ from the depository rates, ultimate charges may be higher or lower than those recorded to date. The company is unable to estimate at this time the amount of additional charges or reversals that may be necessary for this matter in the future. The company believes there should be a negotiated settlement to the softwood lumber dispute and supports efforts to reach a long-term solution to resolve this matter. The U.S. and Canadian governments continue to discuss ways to settle the softwood lumber dispute, but there can be no assurance that they will be able to reach an agreement or the terms and conditions of any agreement.
Kraft Liner/Linerboard Exported from the United States into the Peoples Republic of China
In January 2004, the Ministry of Commerce of the Peoples Republic of China (MOC) received a petition requesting an anti-dumping investigation on imports of unbleached kraft liner/linerboard originating in the United States, Thailand, Korea and Taiwan. On March 31, 2004, the MOC announced it would conduct an investigation based on the allegations contained in the petition. The period of investigation for dumping is from January 1, 2003, to December 31, 2003, and the period of investigation for injury to the Chinese industry is from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2003. The announcement included Weyerhaeuser as one of five producers in the United States that are subject to the investigation. The company registered with the MOC in April 2004 and filed its response in June 2004. A supplemental request for further information was received and responses were filed with the MOC in the first quarter of 2005. In May 2005, the MOC issued a preliminary determination. Weyerhaeusers preliminary anti-dumping tariff was set at 16.0 percent and became effective as of May 31, 2005. A final determination is expected to be issued in the fall of 2005. The company is seeking the termination of the case and/or a reduction of the preliminary anti-dumping tariff through administrative channels. The company currently does not believe that such tariffs will have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, cash flows or financial condition.
In late 2002, the EPA issued a notice of violation (NOV) for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act at the companys Hawesville, Kentucky, pulp and paper mill. Management met with federal officials to resolve the matters alleged in the NOV. Management has reached a tentative settlement of the matter, which includes payment of a penalty of approximately $150,000.
In November 2004, the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality Air Quality Division (DEQ) issued a NOV for alleged violations of the Clean Air Act at the companys Wright City, Oklahoma, wood products facility. Management has been discussing the issues with the DEQ to resolve the matters alleged in the NOV and believes that settlement of the matter may include payment of a civil penalty of approximately $100,000.
The company is also a party to various proceedings relating to the cleanup of hazardous waste sites under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, commonly known as Superfund, and similar state laws. The EPA and/or various state agencies have notified the company that it may be a potentially responsible party with respect to other hazardous waste sites as to which no proceedings have been instituted against the company. As of the end of the second quarter of 2005, the company has established reserves totaling $37 million for estimated remediation costs on all of the approximately 70 active sites across its operations. Environmental remediation reserves totaled $38 million at the end of 2004. The decrease in environmental remediation reserves reflects the incorporation of new information on all sites concerning remediation alternatives, updates on prior cost estimates and new sites, and the costs incurred to remediate these sites during this period. The company accrued remediation costs of $2 million and $2 million in the first twenty-six weeks of 2005 and 2004, respectively. The company incurred remediation costs of $3 million and $5 million in the first twenty-six weeks of 2005 and 2004, respectively, and charged these costs against the reserve. Based on currently available information and analysis, the company believes that it is reasonably possible that costs associated with all identified sites may exceed current accruals by up to $60 million, which may be incurred over several years. This estimate of the upper end of the range of reasonably possible additional costs is much less certain than the estimates upon which accruals are currently based, and utilizes assumptions less favorable to the company among the range of reasonably possible outcomes. In estimating both its current accruals for environmental remediation and the possible range of additional future costs, the company has assumed that it will not bear the entire cost of remediation of every site to the exclusion of other known potentially responsible parties who may be jointly and severally liable. The ability of other potentially responsible parties to participate has been taken into account, generally based on each partys financial condition and probable contribution on a per-site basis. No amounts have been recorded for potential recoveries from insurance carriers.
Weyerhaeuser Company has guaranteed approximately $70 million of debt of unconsolidated entities and other parties. This includes a guarantee of $25 million of debt that has been legally defeased. In connection with the defeasance, Weyerhaeuser Company would be required to pay under the guarantee if the U.S. government securities set aside in an escrow account is insufficient to pay off the debt in 2005. The value of the assets in the escrow account as of June 2005 is approximately $27 million. The remaining debt guarantee of $45 million expires in 2006, but is subject to an annual extension.
As of June 26, 2005, the Real Estate and Related Assets segment has guaranteed approximately $22 million of debt of unconsolidated entities and has guaranteed performance under two operating leases with future lease payments of approximately $27 million. The debt guarantees expire as follows: $1 million in 2005, $9 million in 2007, $11 million in 2009, and $1 million in 2011. For each of the operating lease guarantees, which extend through 2041, the Real Estate and Related Assets segment would be required to perform if the obligor were to default.
WRECO provides warranties on homes closed that vary depending on state and local laws. The reserves for these warranties are determined by applying the provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 5, Accounting for Contingencies. The liability was approximately $17 million and $14 million at June 26, 2005, and December 26, 2004, respectively.
Note 14: Charges for Integration and Restructuring
Weyerhaeuser incurred the following charges for integration and restructuring;
As of June 26, 2005, Weyerhaeuser accrued liabilities include approximately $9 million of severance accruals related to integration and restructuring charges recognized from 2003 through June 26, 2005. These accruals are associated with the termination of approximately 300 employees that have not yet occurred.
Note 15: Charges for Closure of Facilities
Weyerhaeuser incurred the following charges for the closure of facilities:
Changes in accrued severance during the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, were as follows:
Note 16: Other Operating Costs, Net
Other operating costs, net, is an aggregation of both recurring and occasional income and expense items and, as a result, can fluctuate from period to period. Weyerhaeusers other operating costs, net, includes the following pretax items:
(Gain) loss on disposition of assets for the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004, includes a pretax gain of $33 million that was recognized in the first quarter on the sale of an oriented strand board mill in Slave Lake, Alberta. Also included in (gain) loss on disposition of assets for both the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004, are charges of $6 million related to goodwill written off in connection with facility sales.
Foreign exchange gains and losses result from changes in exchange rates, primarily related to Weyerhaeusers Canadian and New Zealand operations.
Note 17: Income Taxes
On October 22, 2004, the American Jobs Creation Act (AJCA) became law. The AJCA includes a deduction of 85 percent of certain foreign earnings that are repatriated, as defined by the AJCA. Based on this legislation and 2005 guidance by the Department of Treasury, the company repatriated $1.1 billion of foreign earnings in July 2005. A charge of $44 million related to the planned repatriation was accrued in the second quarter of 2005 and is included in income taxes (from continuing operations) in the accompanying consolidated statement of earnings.
The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) has asserted that approximately $322 million of solid waste disposal revenue bonds do not qualify as tax-exempt. The company previously disclosed that the IRS issued preliminary adverse determinations on the tax-exempt status of these bonds. The company is contesting the assertion and the respective tax issues are at various stages in the audit, appeals and litigation process. The additional income tax attributable to deductions that the company has taken on its income tax returns for the interest could be up to approximately $21 million. The company does not expect any future charges related to this matter to have a material adverse affect on its results of operations, cash flows or financial position.
Note 18: Discontinued Operations
B.C. Coastal sale
On May 30, 2005, the company sold its B.C. Coastal operations to Coastal Acquisition Ltd., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Brascan Corporation of Toronto, Canada for approximately $1.2 billion (Canadian) plus working capital. The sale included 635,000 acres (258,000 hectares) of private timberlands and the annual harvesting rights to 3.6 million cubic meters of timber subject to public timber leases. The sale also included five softwood sawmills, with a combined annual production of 690 million board feet, and two remanufacturing facilities. Prior to the sale, the companys B.C. Coastal operations were included in both the Timberlands and Wood Products segments.
The company recognized a gain on the sale of $110 million, including a tax benefit of $46 million, in the second quarter of 2005. The pretax gain of $64 million is included in contribution to earnings of the Corporate and Other segment for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005. The company received net proceeds of approximately $1.1 billion (U.S.) from the sale, including working capital. The sale agreement provides for subsequent adjustment of the sale price for certain matters such as working capital.
The following table summarizes the U.S. dollar components of net earnings from discontinued operations for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005, and June 27, 2004:
The income tax benefit recognized upon the sale of the B.C. Coastal operations includes a deferred tax benefit of $185 million resulting from the rollout of temporary differences on the assets sold and a current tax expense of $139 million on the taxable gain. Current taxes reflect the benefit of favorable capital gains treatment applicable to the sale of timberlands in Canada.
The following table summarizes the U.S. dollar carrying values of the assets and liabilities of the discontinued operations as of December 26, 2004:
Note 19: Subsequent Event
In May 2005, the company exercised an option to put its interest in MAS Capital Management Partners, L.P., an equity affiliate, to the general partner. The transaction closed in July 2005. The company received net cash proceeds of approximately $115 million and will recognize a pretax gain on the sale of its investment of $115 million in the third quarter of 2005.
Note 20: Business Segments
The company is principally engaged in the growing and harvesting of timber; the manufacture, distribution and sale of forest products; and real estate development and construction. The companys business segments are:
As disclosed in Note 18: Discontinued Operations, the company closed on the sale of its B.C. Coastal operations in the second quarter of 2005. The segment data presented in the table below includes the activities of the B.C. Coastal operations in the Timberlands and Wood Products segments and includes the pretax gain on the sale of $64 million in Corporate and Other.
Information previously reported as the Pulp and Paper segment is now reported as the Cellulose Fiber and White Papers segment. This is a change in segment name only. There were no organizational changes and there has been no recasting of financial information as a result of this change.
An analysis and reconciliation of the companys business segment information to the respective information in the consolidated financial statements is as follows:
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operations
Some information included in this report contains statements concerning the companys future results and performance that are forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Some of these forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as expects, may, will, believes, should, approximately, anticipates, estimates, and plans, and the negative or other variations of those terms or comparable terminology or by discussions of strategy, plans or intentions. In particular, some of these forward-looking statements deal with expectations regarding the companys markets in the third quarter; expected earnings and performance of the companys business segments during the third quarter, demand and pricing for the companys products in the third quarter, supply, raw material and freight costs, reduced timber harvest in the third quarter, maintenance downtime, new home sales, capital expenditures and related matters. The accuracy of such statements is subject to a number of risks, uncertainties and assumptions that may cause actual results to differ materially from those projected, including, but not limited to:
The company is also a large exporter and is affected by changes in economic activity in Europe and Asia, particularly Japan, and by changes in currency exchange rates, particularly the relative value of the U.S. dollar to the Euro and the Canadian dollar, and restrictions on international trade or tariffs imposed on imports, including the countervailing and anti-dumping duties imposed on the companys softwood lumber shipments from Canada to the United States. These and other factors could cause or contribute to actual results differing materially from such forward-looking statements and, accordingly, no assurances can be given that any of the events anticipated by the forward-looking statements will occur, or if any of them occurs, what effect they will have on the companys results of operations or financial condition. The company expressly declines any obligation to publicly revise any forward-looking statements that have been made to reflect the occurrence of events after the date of this report.
Results of Operations
The term company refers to Weyerhaeuser Company and all of its majority-owned domestic and foreign subsidiaries and variable interest entities of which Weyerhaeuser Company or its subsidiaries are determined to be the primary beneficiary. The term Weyerhaeuser refers to the forest products-based operations and excludes the Real Estate and Related Assets operations. The term price realizations refers to net selling prices, which include freight and are net of normal sales deductions. The term contribution to earnings refers to segment earnings before interest and taxes.
A summary of consolidated results for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005, and June 27, 2004, follows:
Net sales and revenues for the second quarter of 2005 increased $110 million, or 2 percent, over the second quarter of 2004. Year-to-date net sales and revenues increased $603 million, or 6 percent, for the first half of 2005 as compared to the same period in 2004. A general improvement in the U.S. economy, continued strong U.S. housing starts and strong housing markets in most of the geographies in which the company has homebuilding operations led to improved price realizations for engineered lumber, fine paper, packaging and real estate. The increase in sales of these products in both the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005, more than offset declines in lumber and structural panel sales, when compared to the same periods of 2004. While markets for lumber and structural panels remain strong in 2005, additional market supply and the building of inventories by dealers and distributors during the winter months resulted in lower price realizations for the first half of 2005, as compared with exceptionally high prices reached during the first half of 2004. Net earnings for the second quarter of 2005 of $420 million, were $51 million higher than net earnings from second quarter of 2004. Year-to-date net earnings for 2005 were $169 million higher than for the same period of 2004.
The results presented in the table above exclude the results of the companys British Columbia Coastal Group (B.C. Coastal) operations, which were sold in May 2005. The B.C. Coastal operations are presented as discontinued operations in the accompanying consolidated financial statements. See Note 18 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. Net sales and revenues and operating income of the B.C. Coastal operations for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005, and June 27, 2004 were as follows:
Items that Affected Results
A summary of some significant items that are included in operating income and net earnings follows:
These and other factors that affected the quarterly and year-to-date comparison of operating income and net earnings are discussed in the segment analyses that follow. The Timberlands and Wood Products segment analyses include the results of the companys B.C. Coastal operations through the date of sale at the end of May 2005.
Third-party log sales volumes and fee harvest volumes for Timberlands for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005, and June 27, 2004, are as follows:
Net sales and revenues decreased $19 million, or 7 percent, for the thirteen-week period ended June 26, 2005, compared to the same period in 2004, primarily due to a decrease in log sales revenue. The volume of logs sold to export and domestic markets declined 13 percent and 7 percent respectively, in the thirteen weeks ended June 26, 2005, as compared to the thirteen weeks ended June 27, 2004. Log sales volumes declined due to lower levels of fee harvest in the West and South. In the West, harvest levels for the second quarter of 2004 were higher than normal, due to the anticipation of an unusually long fire season in 2004. In the South, the decline in harvest levels was primarily due to the sale of Georgia timberlands in the third quarter of 2004. Log price realizations for the second quarter of 2005 decreased 1 percent in the West, but increased 7 percent in the South, as compared to the second quarter of 2004.
Net sales and revenues decreased $6 million, or 1 percent, in the first half of 2005 as compared to the first half of 2004. Sales of logs decreased $27 million. This was partially offset by a $21 million increase in other revenues, primarily related to the sale of oil, gas and minerals and non-strategic timberlands. The volume of logs sold to export and domestic markets declined 9 percent and 17 percent respectively, for the first half of 2005, as compared to the first half of 2004. The decrease in log sales volumes in the first half of 2005, as compared to the first half of 2004, was primarily due to the anticipation of the long fire season in 2004 in the West and the sale of the Georgia timberlands in the South, as discussed in the preceding quarter-to-quarter comparison. On a year-to-date basis, log price realizations increased 1 percent in the West, and 7 percent in the South in 2005 as compared to 2004.
Contribution to earnings increased $9 million and $50 million for the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, respectively, compared to the thirteen and twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004. Items that affected the quarterly and year-to-date comparison of Timberlands contribution to earnings include the following:
Timberlands third quarter earnings are expected to be slightly lower than the second quarter, due to reduced harvest and sales activity from normal seasonal shutdowns. Export prices are expected to be modestly higher, but not enough to offset anticipated declines in domestic log prices.
Demand for building products during the first half of 2005 was similar to the first half of 2004, as indicated by U.S. housing starts. The seasonally adjusted annual rate for U.S. housing starts was 2.1 million and 2.0 million for the first and second quarters of 2005, compared to 1.9 million for the both of the comparable periods in 2004. However, to avoid the product shortages that were caused by transportation issues in the first half of 2004, dealers and distributors built inventories through the winter months in advance of the spring construction season. This, combined with additional supply from manufacturers, was effective in preventing a repeat of the extraordinary price activity in structural panels that occurred in the first half of 2004, and resulted in overall lower average prices for oriented strand board and plywood for the first two quarters in 2005, and lower average prices for lumber in the second quarter of 2005.
Net sales and revenues decreased $197 million, or 7 percent, for the thirteen-week period ended June 26, 2005, compared to the thirteen-week period ended June 27, 2004. The overall decrease is primarily the result of lower prices for structural panels and softwood lumber due to market factors mentioned above. The significant changes in second quarter net sales and revenues include the following:
Net sales and revenues decreased $105 million, or 2 percent, in the first half of 2005, compared to the first half of 2004. The significant changes in year-to-date net sales and revenues included:
Segment contribution to earnings was $204 million in the thirteen weeks ended June 26, 2005, down from $448 million in the thirteen weeks ended June 27, 2004. The year-to-date contribution to earnings was $335 million for 2005, down from $621 million for 2004. The following factors affected the quarterly and year-to-date comparison of segment contribution to earnings:
Prices for commodity building products are expected to drop seasonally in the third quarter. Shipment volumes are expected to be flat. As a result, third quarter earnings are expected to decline to a level closer to the first quarter.
Third party sales and total production volumes for the major products in the Wood Products segment for the thirteen and twenty-six week periods ended June 26, 2005, and June 27, 2004, are as follows:
Cellulose Fiber and White Papers (formerly Pulp and Paper)
Net sales and revenues increased $65 million, or 6 percent, for the thirteen-week period ended June 26, 2005, compared to the thirteen-week period ended June 27, 2004. The increase was primarily due to the following:
Net sales and revenues increased $174 million, or 9 percent, for the twenty-six weeks ended June 26, 2005, compared to the twenty-six weeks ended June 27, 2004. The significant changes in net sales and revenues included the following:
The second quarter 2005 contribution to earnings of $16 million increased slightly over the $14 million contribution in the same period of 2004. The segment had a contribution to earnings of $35 million in the twenty-six week period ended June 26, 2005, compared to an $11 million loss in the twenty-six week period ended June 27, 2004. The following factors affected the comparison of segment contribution to earnings for the second quarter and for the first half of 2005:
Price declines are expected for papergrade pulp and fine paper product lines in the coming months. However, the company expects that minimal scheduled maintenance downtime will result in lower costs and higher third quarter earnings.
Third party sales and total production volumes for major Cellulose Fiber and White Papers products follow:
Containerboard, Packaging and Recycling