XML 22 R6.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.8
GENERAL
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2013
Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
GENERAL

1. GENERAL

Basis of Presentation: The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Getty Realty Corp. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries. We are a real estate investment trust (“REIT”) specializing in the ownership, leasing and financing of retail motor fuel and convenience store properties. The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). We manage and evaluate our operations as a single segment. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.

Use of Estimates, Judgments and Assumptions: The financial statements have been prepared in conformity with GAAP, which requires management to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expenses during the period reported. Estimates, judgments and assumptions underlying the accompanying consolidated financial statements include, but are not limited to, receivables, deferred rent receivable, net investment in direct financing leases, environmental remediation costs, real estate, depreciation and amortization, impairment of long-lived assets, litigation, environmental remediation obligations, accrued liabilities, income taxes and the allocation of the purchase price of properties acquired to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Application of these estimates and assumptions requires exercise of judgment as to future uncertainties, and as a result, actual results could differ materially from these estimates.

Subsequent events: We evaluated subsequent events and transactions for potential recognition or disclosure in our consolidated financial statements.

Fair Value Hierarchy: The preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP requires management to make estimates of fair value that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and revenues and expenses during the period reported using a hierarchy (the “Fair Value Hierarchy”) that prioritizes the inputs to valuation techniques used to measure the fair value. The Fair Value Hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The levels of the Fair Value Hierarchy are as follows: “Level 1”— inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that we have the ability to access at the measurement date; “Level 2”— inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability either directly or indirectly, including inputs in markets that are not considered to be active; and “Level 3”— inputs that are unobservable. Certain types of assets and liabilities are recorded at fair value either on a recurring or non-recurring basis. Assets required or elected to be marked-to-market and reported at fair value every reporting period are valued on a recurring basis. Other assets not required to be recorded at fair value every period may be recorded at fair value if a specific provision or other impairment is recorded within the period to mark the carrying value of the asset to market as of the reporting date. Such assets are valued on a non-recurring basis.

 

We had a receivable of $2,972,000 as of December 31, 2012, that was measured at fair value on a recurring basis using Level 3 inputs. Pursuant to the terms of the Litigation Funding Agreement (as defined below), in the third quarter of 2013, we received a payment of $25,096,000 related to this receivable. We elected to account for the advances, accrued interest and litigation reimbursements due to us pursuant to the Litigation Funding Agreement on a fair value basis. We used unobservable inputs based on comparable transactions when determining the fair value of the Litigation Funding Agreement. We concluded that the terms of the Litigation Funding Agreement are within a range of terms representing the market for such arrangements when considering the unique circumstances particular to the counterparties to such funding agreements. These inputs include the potential outcome of the litigation related to the Lukoil Complaint including the probability of the Marketing Estate prevailing in its lawsuit and the potential amount that may be recovered by the Marketing Estate from Lukoil (as such capitalized terms are defined below). We also applied a discount factor commensurate with the risk that the Marketing Estate may not prevail in its lawsuit. We considered that fair value is defined as an amount of consideration that would be exchanged between a willing buyer and seller.

We have mutual fund assets that are measured at fair value on a recurring basis using Level 1 inputs. We have a Supplemental Retirement Plan for executives and other senior management employees. The amounts held in trust under the Supplemental Retirement Plan may be used to satisfy claims of general creditors in the event of the Company’s or any of its subsidiaries’ bankruptcy. We have liability to the employees participating in the Supplemental Retirement Plan for the participant account balances equal to the aggregate of the amount invested at the employees’ direction and the income earned in such mutual funds.

We have certain real estate assets that are measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis using Level 3 inputs as of September 30, 2013 and December 31, 2012 of $7,173,000 and $4,967,000, respectively, where impairment charges have been recorded. Due to the subjectivity inherent in the internal valuation techniques used in estimating fair value, the amounts realized from the sale of such assets may vary significantly from these estimates.

The following summarizes as of September 30, 2013 our assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis by level within the Fair Value Hierarchy:

 

(in thousands)

   Level 1      Level 2      Level 3      Total  

Assets:

           

Mutual funds

   $ 3,232       $ —         $ —         $ 3,232   

Liabilities

           

Deferred Compensation

   $ 3,232       $ —         $ —         $ 3,232   

The following summarizes as of December 31, 2012 our assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis by level within the Fair Value Hierarchy:

 

(in thousands)

   Level 1      Level 2      Level 3      Total  

Assets:

           

Receivable

   $ —         $ —         $ 2,972       $ 2,972   

Mutual funds

   $ 3,013       $ —         $ —         $ 3,013   

Liabilities

           

Deferred Compensation

   $ 3,013       $ —         $ —         $ 3,013   

Discontinued Operations: We report as discontinued operations 131 properties which meet the criteria to be accounted for as held for sale in accordance with GAAP as of the end of the current period and certain properties disposed of during the periods presented. Discontinued operations, including gains and losses, impairment charges and the operating results for properties disposed of in 2013 and 2012 and impairment charges and operating results of properties classified as held for sale, are included in a separate component of income in our consolidated statements of operations. The operating results and impairment charges of such properties for the three and nine months ended 2012 have also been reclassified to discontinued operations to conform to the 2013 presentation. The properties currently being marketed for sale have a net carrying value aggregating $30,061,000 and are included in real estate held for sale, net in our consolidated balance sheets.

The revenue from rental properties, impairment charges, other operating expenses and gains from dispositions of real estate related to these properties are as follows:

 

     Three months ended
September 30,
    Nine months ended
September 30,
 

(in thousands)

   2013     2012     2013     2012  

Revenues from rental properties

   $ 591      $ 1,208      $ 2,185      $ 8,781   

Impairment charges

     (2,727     (6,407     (6,353     (7,633

Other operating (expenses) credit

     1,716        (1,997     495        (8,752
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Loss from operating activities

     (420     (7,196     (3,673     (7,604

Gains from dispositions of real estate

     27,002        576        39,608        3,819   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Earnings (loss) from discontinued operations

   $ 26,582      $ (6,620   $ 35,935      $ (3,785
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets and Long-Lived Assets to Be Disposed Of: Assets are written down to fair value when events and circumstances indicate that the assets might be impaired and the projected undiscounted cash flows estimated to be generated by those assets are less than the carrying amount of those assets. We review and adjust as necessary our depreciation estimates and method when long-lived assets are tested for recoverability. Assets held for disposal are written down to fair value less estimated disposition costs.

We recorded non-cash impairment charges aggregating $3,265,000 and $7,717,000 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively and $7,406,000 and $10,552,000 for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, respectively, in continuing operations and in discontinued operations. We record non-cash impairment charges and reduce the carrying amount of properties held for use to fair value where the carrying amount of the property exceeded the projected undiscounted cash flows expected to be received during the assumed holding period which includes the estimated sales value expected to be received at disposition. We record non-cash impairment charges and reduce the carrying amount of properties held for sale to fair value less disposal costs. The non-cash impairment charges recorded during the nine months ended September 30, 2013 and 2012 were attributable to reductions in the assumed holding period used to test for impairment, reductions in our estimates of value for properties held for sale and the accumulation of asset retirement costs as a result of an increase in estimated environmental liabilities which increased the carrying value of certain properties in excess of their fair value. The estimated fair value of real estate is based on the price that would be received to sell the property in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The internal valuation techniques that we used included discounted cash flow analysis, an income capitalization approach on prevailing or earnings multiples applied to earnings from the property, analysis of recent comparable lease and sales transactions, actual leasing or sale negotiations, bona fide purchase offers received from third parties and/or consideration of the amount that currently would be required to replace the asset, as adjusted for obsolescence. In general, we consider multiple internal valuation techniques when measuring the fair value of a property, all of which are based on unobservable inputs and assumptions that are classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. These unobservable inputs include assumed holding periods ranging up to 15 years, assumed average rent increases ranging up to 2.0% annually, income capitalized at a rate of 8.0% and cash flows discounted at a rate of 7.0%. These assessments have a direct impact on our net income because recording an impairment loss results in an immediate negative adjustment to net income. The evaluation of anticipated cash flows is highly subjective and is based in part on assumptions regarding future rental rates and operating expenses that could differ materially from actual results in future periods. Where properties held for use have been identified as having a potential for sale, additional judgments are required related to the determination as to the appropriate period over which the projected undiscounted cash flows should include the operating cash flows and the amount included as the estimated residual value. This requires significant judgment. In some cases, the results of whether impairment is indicated are sensitive to changes in assumptions input into the estimates, including the holding period until expected sale.

Unaudited, Interim Financial Statements: The consolidated financial statements are unaudited but, in our opinion, reflect all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) necessary for a fair statement of the results for the periods presented. These statements should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and related notes, which appear in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012.

Income Taxes: We and our subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return. Effective January 1, 2001, we elected to qualify, and believe we are operating so as to qualify, as a REIT for federal income tax purposes. Accordingly, we generally will not be subject to federal income tax on qualifying REIT income, provided that distributions to our shareholders equal at least the amount of our taxable income as defined under the Internal Revenue Code. We accrue for uncertain tax matters when appropriate. The accrual for uncertain tax positions is adjusted as circumstances change and as the uncertainties become more clearly defined, such as when audits are settled or exposures expire. Although tax returns for the years 2009, 2010 and 2011, and tax returns which will be filed for the year ended 2012, remain open to examination by federal and state tax jurisdictions under the respective statute of limitations, we have not currently identified any uncertain tax positions related to those years and, accordingly, have not accrued for uncertain tax positions as of December 31, 2012.

In the third quarter of 2013, we submitted to the Internal Revenue Service a request seeking a ruling that a portion of the payments we received from the Marketing Estate related to the Litigation Funding Agreement, (see note 2 for additional information regarding the Lukoil Settlement and the Litigation Funding Agreement), be treated either as qualifying income or excluded from gross income for the purposes of the REIT qualification gross income tests either as a matter of law or pursuant to the discretionary authority granted by Congress to the Internal Revenue Service to determine whether certain types of income are an outgrowth of a REIT’s business of owning and operating real estate. The tests provide that 95% and 75% of a REIT’s gross income must be derived from qualified passive income sources as defined in the respective tests, such as rents from real properties. If we do not receive a favorable ruling on this matter we may incur a tax liability equal to (A) to the greater of the amount by which we fail to meet either the 95% or 75% income test multiplied (B) by the fraction the numerator of which is our net income (determined in a certain manner) and the denominator of which is our gross income for the tax year. Income excluded from gross income for the purposes of the REIT qualification gross income tests is; however, included in the calculation of taxable income and in the determination of distributions required as a REIT to be made to our shareholders. Based on prior administrative practices and rulings regarding similar circumstances made by the Internal Revenue Service, we believe that we will receive a favorable ruling from the Internal Revenue Service; therefore, we have not accrued for taxes or penalties related to this uncertain tax position as of September 30, 2013. An unfavorable outcome of this matter could cause a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, ability to pay dividends or stock price.

Earnings per Common Share: Basic earnings per common share gives effect, utilizing the two-class method, to the potential dilution from the issuance of common shares in settlement of restricted stock units (“RSUs” or “RSU”) which provide for non-forfeitable dividend equivalents equal to the dividends declared per common share. Basic earnings per common share is computed by dividing net earnings less dividend equivalents attributable to RSUs by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding during the year. Diluted earnings per common share, also gives effect to the potential dilution from the exercise of stock options utilizing the treasury stock method.

 

     Three months ended
September 30,
    Nine months ended
September 30,
 

(in thousands)

   2013     2012     2013     2012  

Earnings from continuing operations

   $ 15,295      $ 3,155      $ 29,031      $ 10,431   

Less dividend equivalents attributable to restricted stock units outstanding

     (134     (27     (255     (67
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Earnings from continuing operations attributable to common shareholders used for basic earnings per share calculation

     15,161        3,128        28,776        10,364   

Earnings (loss) from discontinued operations

     26,582        (6,620     35,935        (3,785
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Net earnings (loss) attributable to common shareholders used for basic earnings per share calculation

   $ 41,743      $ (3,492   $ 64,711      $ 6,579   
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

 

Basic and diluted weighted-average number of common shares outstanding

     33,397        33,396        33,397        33,395   

Restricted stock units outstanding at the end of the period

     296        216        296        216