XML 45 R22.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.1.9
Commitments and Contingencies
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]  
Commitments and Contingencies
14.
Commitments and Contingencies

We enter into non-cancelable fixed purchase and service obligations in the ordinary course of business.  These arrangements primarily consist of advertising commitments and service contracts.  At December 31, 2014, future non-cancelable purchase and service obligations greater than $100,000 and one year were as follows (in thousands):
 
2015
 
$
10,224

2016
 
7,899

2017
 
4,179

2018
 
2,628

2019
 
1,774

Thereafter
 
2,693

Total obligations
 
$
29,397



We are a defendant in various lawsuits and claims arising in the normal course of business.  Management believes it has valid defenses in these cases and is defending them vigorously.  While the results of litigation cannot be predicted with certainty, except as set forth below, management believes the final outcome of such litigation will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position or results of operations.

Federal Unemployment Taxes

Employers in certain states are experiencing higher Federal Unemployment Tax Act (“FUTA”) tax rates as a result of certain states not repaying their unemployment loans from the federal government in a timely manner.  The Benefit Cost Ratio Add-On (“BCR”) is an additional tax on the FUTA wage base for employers in states that continue to have outstanding federal unemployment insurance loans beginning with the fifth year in which there is a balance due on the loan.  States had the option to apply for a waiver before July 1 of the year in which the BCR is applicable. There are currently seven states with outstanding unemployment loans and of those, all but one, Connecticut, have filed and received a BCR waiver. Accordingly, the potential impact of the BCR on our financial statements is not material.

Texas Sales and Use Tax Assessments

In July 2008, we purchased a used aircraft (the “2008 Aircraft”) with the intent to immediately lease it to an aircraft charter service under 14 C.F.R. Part 135 (the “2008 Aircraft Purchase”). In connection with the 2008 Aircraft Purchase, we sought and received a letter ruling from the State of Texas Comptroller’s Tax Policy Division (the “Comptroller’s Ruling”). The Comptroller’s Ruling concluded that the 2008 Aircraft Purchase and lease qualified for the “sale for resale” exemption to sales and use taxes. In 2011, we purchased a used aircraft in a transaction that included the trade-in of the 2008 Aircraft with the intent to immediately lease the newly-purchased aircraft to the same aircraft charter service under Part 135 (“the 2011 Aircraft Purchase”). The structure of the 2011 Aircraft Purchase and lease transaction was patterned after the 2008 Aircraft Purchase. In accordance with the Comptroller’s Ruling, we did not pay sales or use tax on either the 2008 Aircraft Purchase or the 2011 Aircraft Purchase.

The Comptroller’s Office has since changed its view as expressed in the Comptroller’s Ruling and is now asserting that the 2008 Aircraft Purchase and the 2011 Aircraft Purchase are subject to sales and use tax. In May 2012, the Comptroller’s Office issued a notification of examination results regarding the 2008 Aircraft Purchase. It has assessed approximately $0.8 million in taxes but waived any claim for interest and did not assess any penalty. In a separate matter regarding the 2011 Aircraft Purchase, the Comptroller’s Office issued its notification of examination results in December 2013 and assessed approximately $0.9 million in taxes, penalties and interest.

    
We have filed requests for redetermination disputing both assessments and are seeking hearings concerning them. We believe the assessments are without merit and intend to vigorously contest them. At this time, we are unable to determine the ultimate outcome of these matters. However, in the event the State of Texas succeeds with enforcement of the assessments, we may be required to pay some or all of the assessments, which would reduce net income in the reported period.

Massachusetts Tax Assessment

During the fourth quarter of 2012, we received assessments of approximately $2.5 million, including interest and penalties, related to the alleged underpayment of corporate income taxes to the State of Massachusetts for tax years 2006 through 2008.  We believe the assessments are without merit and intend to vigorously contest them.  At this time, we are unable to determine the ultimate outcome of this matter.  However, in the event the State of Massachusetts succeeds with enforcement of the assessments, we may be required to pay some or all of the assessments, which would reduce net income and could have a material adverse effect on net income in the reported period.