10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013

OR

☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from:               to           .

Commission File Number 000-50142

SOLAR POWER, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

California	20-4956638
(State or Other Jurisdiction of	(I.R.S. Employer
Incorporation or Organization)	Identification Number)
3400 Douglas Boulevard, Suite 285
Roseville, California	95661-3888
(Address of Principal Executive Offices)	(Zip Code)

(916) 770-8100

(Issuer’s telephone number)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

None.

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $0.0001

(Title of Class)

OVER THE COUNTER BULLETIN BOARD

(Name of each exchange on which registered)

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Note: Checking the box above will not relieve any registrant required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act from their obligations under those Sections.

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 issuer was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No  ☐

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒ No ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer“, “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer	☐	Accelerated filer	☐
Non-accelerated filer	☐ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)	Smaller reporting company	☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ☐ No  ☒

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, June 30, 2013, was $5,946,434. For purposes of this computation, it has been assumed that the shares beneficially held by directors and officers of registrant were “held by affiliates”; this assumption is not to be deemed to be an admission by such persons that they are affiliates of registrant.

The number of shares of registrant’s common stock outstanding as of April 15, 2014 was 198,214,456.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which Definitive Proxy Statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission not later than 120 days after the registrant’s fiscal year-ended December 31, 2013, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K; provided, however, that any information in such proxy statement that is not required to be included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, shall not be deemed to be incorporated herein by reference or filed as a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I	1
ITEM 1.  BUSINESS	1
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS	3
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS	14
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES	14
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS	15
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES	15
PART II	15
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES	15
ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA	16
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS	16
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK	26
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA	26
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE	27
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES	27
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION	28
PART III	28
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE	28
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION	28
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS	28
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE	28
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES	28
PART IV	29
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES	29
SIGNATURES	32

i 

NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

As used in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, unless otherwise indicated, the terms “we“, “us“, “our” and the “Company” refer to Solar Power, Inc., a California corporation and its wholly-owned subsidiaries.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, and information we provide in our press releases, telephonic reports and other investor communications, including those on our website, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the Securities Act of 1933, which are subject to risks, uncertainties, and assumptions that are difficult to predict. All statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, other than statements of historical fact, are forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are made pursuant to safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The forward-looking statements include statements, among other things, with respect to anticipated future events, including anticipated trends and developments in and management plans for our business and the markets in which we operate and plan to operate; future financial results, operating results, revenues, gross profit, operating expenses, projected costs, and capital expenditures; sales and marketing initiatives; competitive position; and liquidity, capital resources, and availability of future equity capital on commercially reasonable terms. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the use of words such as “expect“, “plan“, “will“, “may“, “anticipate“, “believe“, “estimate“, “should“, “intend“, “forecast“, “project” the negative or plural of these words, and other comparable terminology. Our forward-looking statements are only predictions based on our current expectations and our projections about future events. All forward-looking statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are based upon information available to us as of the filing date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. We undertake no obligation to update any of these forward-looking statements for any reason. These forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance, or achievements to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these statements. These factors include the matters discussed in the section entitled Item 1A — Risk Factors, and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described under this section.

PART I

ITEM 1.     BUSINESS

Overview

Solar Power, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively the “Company”), a California corporation, is a global solar energy facility (“SEF”) developer offering high-quality, low-cost distributed generation and utility-scale SEF development services. Primarily, we partner with developers around the world who hold large portfolios of SEF projects for whom we serve as co-developer and engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) contractor. In addition to developing SEFs using products manufactured by LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), our parent company, we also sell solar modules and balance of system components manufactured by third party vendors to other integrators in the U.S., Asian, and European markets.

In addition to designing, engineering and constructing large-scale SEFs, we also provide long-term operations and maintenance (“O&M”) services through our proprietary O&M program SPIGuardianTM. This service program provides a comprehensive suite of services that commence upon a facility’s commissioning to provide performance monitoring, system reporting, preventative maintenance and full warranty support over the anticipated life of the SEF. While we still consider our O&M services to be within our core competencies, we have obtained third party outsourcing for these services to assist in the reduction of operating expenses.

As shown in the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements, we incurred a net loss of $32.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 and had an accumulated deficit of $56.1 million as of December 31, 2013. Working capital levels have decreased significantly from $22.4 million at December 31, 2012 to negative $36.6 million at December 31, 2013. Our parent company, LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), who owns approximately 71% of our outstanding Common Stock, has disclosed publicly that it had a net loss and negative cash flows from operations for the year ended December 31, 2012 and has a working capital deficit and was not in compliance with certain financial covenants on its indebtedness at December 31, 2012. LDK’s publicly available interim financial information for 2013 shows no significant improvement. In February 2014, LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues. The liquidity issues experienced by LDK have impacted our relationship with China Development Bank (“CDB”), who was to partner with us to provide construction and term financing for our New Jersey and Greek solar development projects. We have experienced cash flow issues due to delays in connection with CDB financing and an inability to extract working capital from completed projects. As a result, we have reduced large portions of our operations and focused on maintaining minimal operating expenses via outsourcing EPC services on our existing projects in New Jersey and elsewhere. In addition, we are focusing on managing our current development portfolio in Hawaii and New Jersey and have ceased our sales efforts in other regions until our longer term cash flow requirements significantly improve. The release of CDB term financing for projects completed and commissioned would significantly improve the cash flow situation and our ability to expand project development efforts. Furthermore, in March 2014, we received notice from Cathay Bank stating that we are in default under our Business Loan Agreement. These factors raise substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern. While our management believes that it has a plan to satisfy liquidity requirements for the next six months there is no assurance that our plan will be successfully implemented. For further discussion, see Note 2 — Going Concern Considerations and Management’s Plan of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2013.

In December 2006, we became a public company through a reverse merger with Solar Power, Inc., a Nevada corporation (formerly Welund Fund, Inc.). On March 31, 2011, LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. by making a significant investment that provided working capital and broader relationships that allowed us to more aggressively pursue commercial and utility projects globally in 2011. LDK’s modules have been used in the majority of the systems we produce; however, we maintain relationships with other module manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of modules. See Note 2 — Going Concern Considerations and Management’s Plan to the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion related to the accounts payables with LDK.

1

In June 2012, we acquired Solar Green Technology S.p.A (“SGT”), a SEF developer headquartered in Milan, Italy, from LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A (“LDK Europe”) and the two founders of SGT. Because LDK Europe is a wholly-owned subsidiary of our parent, LDK, the acquisition was treated as a transaction between entities under common control. In accordance with ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations, these financial statements reflect the combination of Solar Power, Inc., and SGT’s financial statements for all periods presented under which both entities were under the common control of LDK. LDK obtained a controlling interest in SGT on July 20, 2009. LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011. As such, the Company recognized the assets and liabilities of SGT (the accounting receiving entity) at their historical carrying values in accordance with U.S. GAAP and has recast the assets and liabilities of the legacy Solar Power, Inc. entity (the transferring entity) to reflect carrying value of the parent, LDK, which were stepped up to fair value on March 31, 2011 upon LDK obtaining a controlling interested in Solar Power, Inc. In November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. As a result of these actions, the Company deconsolidated SGT on December 30, 2013 when the Company ceased to have a controlling financial interest in SGT. The Company recognized a gain on deconsolidation of $3.5 million which was recognized in other income in the statement of operations as the liquidation is a run-off of operations. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital. SGT currently has insufficient funds to fund the SGT liquidation process. In the event SGT does not receive additional funds needed to proceed with the liquidation, SGT will likely be forced to file for bankruptcy protection.

Our Strategy

Our business strategy is to maintain control of our supply chain, including engineering, procurement, construction, and manufacturing to ensure top-quality products, systems and margin optimization. We provide customers turnkey project development and EPC contractor services, essentially consisting of project financing and post construction asset management of the SEFs through the Company’s O&M services offering SPI Guardian. The end results are to deliver highly efficient and cost effective, world-class solar solutions.

As conventional energy costs rise and fossil fuels dwindle globally, the deployment of renewable energy grows. We believe solar energy will play an increasingly important role in the long term as a growing number of energy independence strategies are deployed worldwide. We presently are focused on the following steps to implement our business strategy:

• Engineering, procurement, and construction excellence. As an experienced designer and builder of small- and large-scale solar systems, we are in a position to identify potential efficiencies at a system level. Our experience in design and construction has led to innovative products and construction techniques that result in lower-cost-per-watt installations than our competitors.

• High-quality, low-cost solar modules and solar components from LDK and other strategic partners. Our management team has extensive experience in designing modules, racking systems and solar energy facilities. The investment by our strategic partner LDK has given us under certain circumstances access to a material supply source for solar modules and the ability to provide bankable modules to our projects.

• Asset management services. Through our comprehensive operations and management services provided by SPI Guardian, we are able to offer our customers superior operation and maintenance services, including system monitoring and reporting capabilities; all of which optimize system performance.

Intellectual Property

We rely and will continue to rely on trade secrets, know-how and other unpatented proprietary information in our business. We have the following trademarks: Yes! Solar Solutions, Yes!, and Sky Mount®. In addition, we have four Patent Cooperation Treaty applications, four provisional patents pending, one patent application and one design application for certain proprietary technologies. The company is currently evaluating the necessity to continue with certain patent activities.

2

Competition

The solar power market is intensely competitive and rapidly evolving, and we compete with major international and domestic companies. Our major competitors in the development of SEFs include completely vertically integrated companies such as SunPower Corporation and First Solar, and companies such as Sun Edison (a wholly owned subsidiary of MEMC Electronic Materials, Inc.) plus numerous regional developers. We compete in the sale of our balance of system products with other manufacturers of racking systems for solar modules. The entire solar industry also faces competition from other power generation sources, both conventional sources, as well as other emerging technologies. Solar power has certain advantages and disadvantages when compared to other power generating technologies. The advantages include the ability to deploy products in many sizes and configurations, install products almost anywhere in the world, provide reliable power for many applications, serve as both a power generator and the skin of a building and eliminate air, water and noise emissions.

Manufacturing and Assembly Capabilities

As described previously, we no longer manufacture solar modules. Through contract manufacturing and assembly relationships, we continue to manufacture balance of system products. Our knowledge and experience of manufacturing and assembly operations in China give us a competitive advantage in the production of balance of system products. Our goal is to continue to reduce costs of the overall solar system to the end customer and ultimately make the actual installed cost of solar equivalent or comparable to the cost of grid-based energy without rebate. These overall reductions in cost will be delivered by reducing labor installation costs through better system design and kit packaging along with reductions in module and balance of system costs through a sustained focus on driving prices down on what are essentially commodity-like products.

Suppliers

There are numerous suppliers of solar modules in the industry, and we have sourced modules from several of them. There does not appear to be a shortage of modules or raw materials used in the manufacture of solar modules required for our SEFs. We anticipate that our primary source of modules will be through LDK, although we are not contractually obligated to purchase solely from LDK.

Sales and Marketing

Our products and services are largely represented through our Company’s sales force located in California. To ensure adequate coverage of the markets we are targeting, we also work with outside sales representatives to cultivate opportunities. These representatives currently cover all viable solar markets; however our primary focus is on the United States (“U.S.”).

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, we had 13 employees, all of whom were full-time. Eleven employees were located in the U.S., and two employees were located Shanghai, China. None of our employees are represented by a labor union nor are we organized under a collective bargaining agreement. We have never experienced a work stoppage and believe that our relations with our employees are good. As of March 31, 2014, we had 15 full-time employees, of which 13 were located in the U.S. and two were located in China.

ITEM 1A.     RISK FACTORS

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risks and all other information contained in our public filings before making an investment decision about our common stock. This section should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the accompanying notes thereto, and Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in this Annual Report. While the risks described below are the ones we believe are most important for you to consider, these risks are not the only ones that we face. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, operating results, liquidity or financial condition could suffer, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment.

3

Risks Related to Our Business

Our risks and uncertainties include, without limitation, our ability to raise capital to finance our operations, the effectiveness, profitability and the marketability of our services, our ability to protect our proprietary information, general economic and business conditions, the impact of new or disruptive technological developments and competition, adverse results of any legal proceedings, the impact of current, pending or future legislation and regulation of the solar power industry, our ability to enter into acceptable relationships with one or more of our suppliers for panel components and the ability of such suppliers to manufacture products or components of an acceptable quality on a cost-effective basis, our ability to attract or retain qualified senior management personnel, including sales and marketing and technical personnel and other risks detailed from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), including those described below. We do not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statements.

The execution of our strategy is dependent upon the continued availability of third-party financing arrangements for our customers.

Generally, our customers must enter into agreements to finance the construction and purchase of our SEF projects. These structured finance arrangements are complex and rely heavily on the creditworthiness of the customer, as well as required returns of the financing companies. Depending on the status of financial markets and general economic conditions overall, financial institutions may be unwilling or unable to finance the cost of construction of our SEF projects. Lack of credit for our customers or restrictions on financial institutions extending such credit will severely limit our ability to maintain or grow our revenues. In addition, an increase in interest or lending rates or a reduction in the supply of project debt financing could reduce the number of solar projects that receive financing, making it difficult for our customers to secure the financing necessary to develop, build, purchase or install an SEF on favorable terms, or at all, and thus lower demand for our SEFs which could limit our growth or reduce our net sales. We are currently seeking debt financing from CDB for customers of three completed projects in Greece. Without such financing, the Company will collect the outstanding development and construction receivables on the projects from the cash flow generated by the project operations over an extended period of time.

Our failure to raise additional capital or generate the significant capital necessary to maintain or expand our operations, or for construction of SEFs, could reduce our ability to compete and could harm our business growth or materially effect our operations.

We expect that our existing cash and cash equivalents, together with collections of our accounts receivable, notes receivable, and costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts, and other cash flows from operations in 2014, will be sufficient to meet our anticipated cash needs to fund operating expenses but generally inadequate to pursue new development projects without additional sources of new capital. However, the timing and amount of our working capital and capital expenditure requirements may vary significantly depending on numerous factors, including the timing of payments from our customers, which have often been slow and late, and the demands of our largest creditor, LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), for immediate payment of amounts owed for solar panels we sold last year and for which we are still awaiting payment from our customer. Further, payments owed to us from completed projects continue to be uncollected, pending customer financing, and although presently owed to us, the cost of litigation would further reduce needed operational cash and not necessarily lead to collection. We have filed appropriate liens and secured our position on finished and in-process projects, but customer fulfillment of long term financing continues to impede timely collection. Any growth in our business depends on our ability to finance multiple development projects simultaneously, and there are serious doubts whether we can finance single projects given the continuing restrictions on debt. In many cases we will need to self-fund development costs for large projects, pending finalization of construction and project financing. These additional costs may result in greater fixed costs and operating expenses well in advance of the collection of revenues, and may be at risk if ultimate construction financing or long-term customer financing are not obtained. Without access to working capital from profitable operations, through equity, or by incurring additional debt, we may not be able to execute our growth strategy or pursue additional projects, which could adversely impact our results of operations, and may impair our longer term viability.

4

Our ability to secure project financing for project development and our outstanding loans and line of credit from CDB may be adversely impacted by LDK Solar’s liquidation and our default under our Cathay Bank loan agreement.

As shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, the Company incurred a net loss of $32.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 and has an accumulated deficit of $56.1 million as of December 31, 2013. Working capital levels have decreased significantly from $22.4 million at December 31, 2012 to negative $36.6 million at December 31, 2013. In February 2014, the Company’s parent company, LDK, who owns approximately 71% of the Company’s outstanding Common Stock, announced that LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues. It is unknown at this time if LDK’s joint provisional liquidation will require or result in the Company disposing of assets in an orderly manner, in a liquidation scenario or at all. If the Company is required to dispose of assets to satisfy LDK’s creditors, it could result in the Company incurring losses.

We are experiencing the following risks and uncertainties in our business:

•   As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company has accounts payable due to LDK of $50.9 million and $51.8 million, respectively. All of the accounts payable due to LDK are currently past due and payable to LDK. Although there are no formal agreements, LDK has verbally indicated that it will not demand payment until the receivable from the customer has been collected. In light of LDK's recent filing for liquidation, it is unclear whether or not LDK will be able to continue to allow the Company to defer repayment to LDK. Should LDK change its position and demand payment for the past due amount prior to collection of the related receivable from the customer, the Company does not have the ability to make the payment currently due without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. With LDK as a majority shareholder, the significant risks and uncertainties associated with their filing for liquidation by LDK could have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of Solar Power, Inc. as well as indicate an inability for LDK to support the Company's business. 

• On March 25, 2014, Solar Power, Inc. (the “Company”) received notice from Cathay Bank stating that the Company is in default under the Business Loan Agreement dated December 26, 2011 and as amended on January 2, 2013 (the “Loan Agreement”) due to (i) the Company failing to make payments as due pursuant to the Loan Agreement and pursuant to the forbearance agreements entered into between the parties, and (ii) the guarantor, LDK, filing an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands on February 24, 2014. Based on these events of default, Cathay Bank has accelerated the entire principal balance due under the Loan Agreement. The Company owes approximately $4.25 million under the Loan Agreement, plus accrued interest and fees. The balance under the Loan Agreement will continue to incur interest at 11% per year. If the Company cannot remedy the default, the Company does not have the ability to make the payments without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. Since the loan balance is secured by the Company’s assets, Cathay Bank may foreclose on the collateral securing the loan which could significantly impact our business and our financial results. 

• China Development Bank (“CDB”) has provided financing for construction and project financing on certain development projects in the past. They have also executed non-binding term sheets for other projects, but there is no assurance that the projects in process will be funded by CDB. CDB has been financing the Company’s projects primarily because the Company’s majority shareholder is LDK and CDB has a long term relationship with LDK. Due to LDK’s financial difficulties and liquidation, certain financing of the Company’s projects have been delayed. If CDB will no longer provide financing for the projects, the Company will need to seek construction financing from other sources which could be very difficult given the Company’s financial condition and its recent default under the Cathay Bank loan agreement as further described below. The company has completed projects in Greece with a customer that is requesting debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding receivables on these projects from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to six years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated. The company has also completed an additional commercial scale project in New Jersey with KDC Solar, which is currently seeking debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding notes receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to fifteen years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated.

• A key term of existing project financing with CDB is that the Company must use solar panels manufactured by LDK. Currently, however, LDK has demanded payment in advance in order to procure their solar panels. If the Company is unable to make advance payments as required, the Company has and will continue to request that its customers make the required cash payments to LDK for the LDK solar panels to be utilized in projects under development. The Company continues to maintain relationships with other solar panel manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of solar panels.

5

The significant risks and uncertainties described above have a significant negative impact on our financial viability and raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern. Management has made changes to our business model by managing cash flow through cost cutting measures, securing project financing before commencing further project development, and requesting that our customers make cash payments for solar panels for projects under development. If the noted banks should call the debt or LDK demand payment of amounts owed by us prior to collection of the related receivables, management plans to obtain additional debt or equity financing. There is no assurance that management’s plans to accelerate the collection of outstanding receivables or to obtain additional debt or equity financing will be successfully implemented, or implemented on terms favorable to us. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had $1.0 million in cash and cash equivalents. The Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities or any other adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

Our wholly-owned subsidiary SGT has appointed a liquidator to liquidate SGT’s assets. In the event, SGT has insufficient funds to fund the liquidation process, SGT may be forced into bankruptcy.

On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. SGT currently has insufficient funds to fund the SGT liquidation process. In the event SGT does not receive additional funds needed to proceed with the liquidation, SGT will likely be forced to file for bankruptcy protection. Upon filing for bankruptcy, the trustee for the SGT bankruptcy is required under Italian law to review SGT’s background and recent history and may bring actions against SGT’s officers, directors and the Company if it can be shown that such persons harmed SGT.

Recent changes to our business strategy provides a limited history on which to base our prospects and anticipated results of operations.

We commenced solar power-related operations in June 2006 and began manufacturing solar modules in April 2007. During 2013, we continued to eliminate and/or consolidate our wholly owned subsidiaries, to focus more strategically on utility construction projects. In 2012, our operating focus shifted principally to the construction of SEFs. A SEF is a complete solar array that is designed and constructed to produce electricity from the sun (DC power) and then convert it, as necessary, to AC power through an inverter to produce power for the end user. We have constructed SEFs mounted on rooftops, parking lot structures and on the ground. Moreover, due to the strategic change in our focus and revenue generating efforts in 2012, our prior operating history and our historical operating results may not provide a meaningful basis for evaluating our business, financial performance and prospects. We have incurred net losses since our inception and as of December 31, 2013, we had an accumulated deficit of approximately $56.1 million. We may be unable to achieve or maintain profitability in the future.

6

Our business strategy depends on the widespread adoption of solar power technology and economics for the construction of SEFs, and if demand for such facilities fails to develop sufficiently, our revenues and ability to achieve or maintain profitability could be harmed.

While the demand for SEFs is emerging and rapidly evolving, its future success is uncertain. If solar power technology proves unsuitable for widespread commercial deployment or if demand for SEFs fails to develop sufficiently, we may not be able to generate enough revenues to achieve and sustain profitability. The factors influencing the widespread adoption of solar power technology through the construction of SEFs include but are not limited to:

• cost-effectiveness, performance, and reliability of solar power technologies as compared with conventional and non-solar alternative energy technologies;

• success of other alternative, distributed generation technologies such as fuel cells, wind power and micro turbines;

• fluctuations in economic and market conditions which impact the viability of conventional and non-solar alternative energy sources, such as increases or decreases in the prices of oil and other fossil fuels; and

• availability of government subsidies and incentives.

The reduction or elimination of government and economic incentives domestically and changes in foreign incentives could cause our revenue to decline.

We believe that the growth of the market for “on-grid” applications, where solar power is used to supplement a customer’s electricity purchased from the utility network, depends in large part on the availability and size of government-generated economic incentives. At present, the cost of producing solar energy generally exceeds the price of electricity in the U.S. from traditional sources. To encourage the adoption of solar technologies, the U.S. government and numerous state governments have provided subsidies in the form of cost reductions, tax write-offs and other incentives to end users, distributors, systems integrators and manufacturers of solar power products. Reduction, elimination and/or periodic interruption of these government subsidies and economic incentives because of policy changes, fiscal tightening or other reasons may result in the diminished competitiveness of solar energy, and materially and adversely affect the growth of these markets and our revenues. Electric utility companies that have significant political lobbying powers may push for a change in the relevant legislation in our markets. The existing Federal Investment Tax Credit was renewed with passage of the 2008 economic stimulus package by the U.S. government. The current Federal Investment Tax Credit allows for a 30% tax credit for both commercial and residential solar installations placed into service on or before December 31, 2016 with no cap and allows the commercial credit to be monetized if it cannot be absorbed by a tax liability.

A significant portion of our prior direct module and balance of system sales occurred outside of the U.S. Changes in the feed-in tariffs in markets like Germany, Spain and Italy, will have a material impact on the financial viability of solar systems in those markets. Consequentially, our ability to sell products into those markets will be impacted. Changes to international programs are not easily forecasted and may happen rapidly, which may result in significant changes in demand for solar products.

7

We act as the general contractor for our customers in connection with the installations of our solar power systems and are subject to risks associated with construction, bonding, cost overruns, delays and other contingencies, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

We act as the general contractor for our customers in connection with the installation of our solar power systems. All essential costs are estimated at the time of entering into the sales contract for a particular project, and these are reflected in the overall price that we charge our customers for the project. These cost estimates are preliminary and may or may not be covered by contracts between us or the other project developers, subcontractors, suppliers and other parties to the project. In addition, we require qualified, licensed subcontractors to install most of our systems. Shortages of such skilled labor could significantly delay a project or otherwise increase our costs. Should miscalculations in planning a project or defective or late execution occur, we may not achieve our expected margins or cover our costs. Additionally, many systems customers require performance bonds issued by a bonding agency. Due to the general performance risk inherent in construction activities, it is sometimes difficult to secure suitable bonding agencies willing to provide performance bonding. In the event we are unable to obtain bonding, we will be unable to bid on, or enter into sales contracts requiring such bonding.

Delays in solar panel or other supply shipments, other construction delays, unexpected performance problems in electricity generation or other events could cause us to fail to meet these performance criteria, resulting in unanticipated and severe revenue and earnings losses and financial penalties. Construction delays are often caused by inclement weather, failure to timely receive necessary approvals and permits, or delays in obtaining necessary solar panels, inverters or other materials. The occurrence of any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

If there is an increase in the price of polysilicon, the corresponding increase in the cost of constructing SEFs may reduce the demand for SEFs, resulting in lower revenues and earnings.

Increases in polysilicon pricing could result in substantial downward pressure on the demand for SEFs due to the overall increase in the cost of production for such projects. Lessening demand for new SEFs may have a negative impact on our revenue and earnings and adversely affect our business and financial condition.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly from period to period; if we fail to meet the expectations of securities analysts or investors, our stock price may decline significantly.

Several factors can contribute to significant quarterly and other periodic fluctuations in our results of operations. These factors may include but are not limited to the following:

• Timing of orders and the volume of orders relative to our capacity;

• Availability of financing for our customers;

• Availability and pricing of raw materials, such as solar cells and wafers and potential delays in delivery of components or raw materials by our suppliers. Solar cells represent over 50% of our direct material cost and fluctuations in pricing or availability of cells will have material impact to our costs and margins;

• Delays in our product sales, design and qualification processes which vary widely in length based upon customer requirements and market acceptance of new products or new generations of products;

• Pricing and availability of competitive products and services;

• Changes in government regulations, tax-based incentive programs, and changes in global economic conditions;

• Delays in installation of specific projects due to inclement weather;

• Any payments required to be made to Cathay Bank to satisfy the Company’s past due obligations; to the SGT liquidator or the SGT bankruptcy trustee if it is determined the Company has liabilities in connection with SGT’s liquidation or bankruptcy; to LDK in the event LDK or its liquidators begins collections on the accounts payables to LDK;

• Changes in currency translation rates affecting margins and pricing levels.

We base our planned operating expenses in part on our expectations of future revenue, and we believe a significant portion of our expenses will be fixed in the short-term. If revenue for a particular quarter is lower than we expect, we likely will be unable to proportionately reduce our operating expenses for that quarter, which would harm our operating results for that quarter. This may cause us to miss analysts’ guidance or any guidance announced by us. If we fail to meet or exceed analyst or investor expectations or our own future guidance, even by a small amount, our stock price could fluctuate, perhaps substantially.

8

We may not be able to efficiently integrate the operations of our acquisitions, products or technologies.

From time to time, we may acquire new and complementary technology, assets and companies. We do not know if we will be able to complete any acquisitions or if we will be able to successfully integrate any acquired businesses, operate them profitably or retain key employees. Integrating any newly acquired business, product or technology could be expensive and time-consuming, disrupt our ongoing business and distract our management. We may face competition for acquisition targets from larger and more established companies with greater financial resources. In addition, in order to finance any acquisitions, we might be forced to obtain equity or debt financing on terms that are not favorable to us, and in the case of equity financing, our stockholders interests may be diluted. If we are unable to integrate effectively any newly acquired company, product or technology, our business, financial condition and operating results could suffer.

We face intense competition and many of our competitors have substantially greater resources than we do.

We compete with major international and domestic companies. Some of our current and potential competitors have greater market recognition and customer base, longer operating histories and substantially greater financial, technical, marketing, distribution, purchasing, manufacturing, personnel and other resources than we do. In addition, many of our competitors are developing and are currently producing products based on new solar power technologies that may ultimately have costs similar to or lower than our projected costs.

Some of our competitors own, partner with, have longer term or stronger relationships with solar cell providers than we do, which could result in them being able to obtain solar cells on a more favorable basis than us. It is possible that new competitors or alliances among existing competitors could emerge and rapidly acquire significant market share, which would harm our business. If we fail to compete successfully, our business would suffer and we may lose or be unable to gain market share.

Existing regulations and policies of the electric utility industry and changes to these regulations and policies may present technical, regulatory and economic barriers to the purchase and use of our products, which may significantly reduce demand for our products.

The market for electricity generating products is strongly influenced by federal, state and local government regulations and policies concerning the electric utility industry, as well as policies promulgated by electric utilities. These regulations and policies often relate to electricity pricing and technical interconnection of customer-owned electricity generation. In the U.S., these regulations and policies are being modified and may continue to be modified. Customer purchases of alternative energy sources, including solar power technology, could be deterred by these regulations and policies, which could result in a significant reduction in the demand for our solar power products. For example, without a regulatory-mandated exception for solar power systems, utility customers are often charged interconnection or standby fees for putting distributed power generation on the electric utility grid. These fees could increase the cost to our customers and make our solar power products less desirable.

The failure to increase or restructure the net metering caps could adversely affect our business. In the U.S., all grid-tied photovoltaic systems are installed with cooperation by the local utility providers under guidelines created through statewide net metering policies. These policies require local utilities to purchase from end users excess solar electricity for a credit against their utility bills. The amount of solar electricity that the utility is required to purchase is referred to as a net metering cap. If these net metering caps are reached and local utilities are not required to purchase solar power, or if the net metering caps do not increase in the locations where we install our solar product, demand for our products could decrease. The solar industry is currently lobbying to extend these arbitrary net metering caps and replace them with either notably higher numbers or with a revised method of calculation that will allow the industry to continue our expansion in a manner consistent with both the industry and state and federal desires.

Moreover, we anticipate that our solar power installation will be subject to oversight and regulation in accordance with national and local ordinances relating to building codes, safety, environmental protection, utility interconnection and metering and related matters.

9

It is difficult to track the requirements of individual states and design equipment to comply with the varying standards. Any new government regulations or utility policies pertaining to our solar power products may result in significant additional expenses to us, our resellers, and our customers and as a result, could cause a significant reduction in demand for our solar power products.

Compliance with environmental regulations can be expensive and noncompliance with these regulations may result in adverse publicity and potentially significant monetary damages and fines.

We are required to comply with extensive environmental laws and regulations at the national, state, local, and international levels. These environmental laws and regulations include those governing the discharge of pollutants into the air and water, the use, management, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes, the cleanup of contaminated sites, and occupational health and safety. We have incurred and will continue to incur significant costs and capital expenditures in complying with these laws and regulations. In addition, violations of or liabilities under environmental laws or permits may result in restrictions being imposed on our operating activities or in our being subjected to substantial fines, penalties, criminal proceedings, third party property damage or personal injury claims, cleanup costs, or other costs. While we believe we are currently in substantial compliance with applicable environmental requirements, future developments such as more aggressive enforcement policies, and the implementation of new, more stringent laws and regulations, or the discovery of presently unknown environmental conditions may require expenditures that could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition.

We generally recognize revenue on system installations on a “percentage of completion” basis and payments are due upon the achievement of contractual milestones and any delay or cancellation of a project could adversely affect our business.

We generally recognize revenue on our system installations on a “percentage of completion” basis, and as a result, our revenues from these installations are driven by the performance of our contractual obligations, which is generally driven by timelines for the installation of our solar power systems at customer sites. This could result in unpredictability of revenue and in the near term, a revenue decrease. As with any project-related business, there is the potential for delays within any particular customer project. Variation of project timelines and estimates may impact our ability to recognize revenue in a particular period. In addition, certain customer contracts may include payment milestones due at specified points during a project. Because we must invest substantial time and incur significant expense in advance of achieving milestones and the receipt of payments, failure to achieve milestones could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

We are subject to particularly lengthy sales cycles in some markets.

Our focus on developing a customer base that requires installation of a solar power system means that it may take longer to develop strong customer relationships or partnerships. Moreover, factors specific to certain industries also have an impact on our sales cycles. Some of our customers may have longer sales cycles that could occur due to the timing of various state and federal subsidies. These lengthy and challenging sales cycles may mean that it could take longer before our sales and marketing efforts result in revenue, if at all, and may have adverse effects on our operating results, financial condition, cash flows and stock price.

Our competitive position depends in part on maintaining intellectual property protection.

Our ability to compete and to achieve and maintain profitability depends in part on our ability to protect our proprietary discoveries and technologies. We currently rely on a combination of copyrights, trademarks, trade secret laws and confidentiality agreements to protect our intellectual property rights. We also rely upon unpatented know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position.

From time to time, the U.S. Supreme Court, other federal courts, the U.S. Congress or the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office may change the standards of patentability, and any such changes could have a negative impact on our business.

10

We may face intellectual property infringement claims that could be time-consuming and costly to defend and result in our loss of significant rights and the assessment of damages.

If we receive notice of claims of infringement, misappropriation or misuse of other parties’ proprietary rights, some of these claims could lead to litigation. We cannot provide assurance that we will prevail in these actions or that other actions alleging misappropriation or misuse by us of third-party trade secrets, infringement by us of third-party patents and trademarks or the validity of our patents will not be asserted or prosecuted against us. We may also initiate claims to defend our intellectual property rights. Intellectual property litigation, regardless of outcome, is expensive and time-consuming, could divert management’s attention from our business and have a material negative effect on our business, operating results or financial condition. If there is a successful claim of infringement against us, we may be required to pay substantial damages (including treble damages if we were to be found to have willfully infringed a third party’s patent) to the party claiming infringement, develop non-infringing technology, stop selling our products or using technology that contains the allegedly infringing intellectual property or enter into royalty or license agreements that may not be available on acceptable or commercially practical terms, if at all. Our failure to develop non-infringing technologies or license the proprietary rights on a timely basis could harm our business. Parties making infringement claims on future issued patents may be able to obtain an injunction that would prevent us from selling our products or using technology that contains the allegedly infringing intellectual property, which could harm our business.

We are exposed to risks associated with product liability claims in the event that installation of our solar power systems results in injury or damage, and we have limited insurance coverage to protect against such claims and additionally those losses resulting from business interruptions or natural disasters.

Since our solar power systems are electricity-producing devices, it is possible that users could be injured or killed by our systems, whether by improper installation or other causes. As an installer of products that are used by consumers, we face an inherent risk of exposure to product liability claims or class action suits in the event that the installation of the solar power systems results in injury or damage. Moreover, to the extent that a claim is brought against us, we may not have adequate resources to defend ourselves. We rely on our general liability insurance to cover product liability claims and have not obtained separate product liability insurance. The successful assertion of product liability claims against us could result in potentially significant monetary damages and, if our insurance protection is inadequate, could require us to make significant payments which could have a materially adverse effect on our financial results. Any business disruption or natural disaster could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources.

Since we cannot test solar panels for the duration of our vendors or the industry standard 25-year warranty period, we may be subject to unexpected warranty expense; if we are subject to warranty and product liability claims that our vendors do not cover, such claims could adversely affect our business and results of operations.

The possibility of future product failures could cause us to incur substantial expense to repair or replace defective products. We have agreed to indemnify our customers and our distributors in some circumstances against liability from defects in, or performance from, solar modules that we purchase and install. A successful indemnification claim against us could require us to make significant damage payments, which would negatively affect our financial results.

Standard product warranty for solar panel systems includes a 10-year warranty period for defects in materials and workmanship and a 25-year warranty period for declines in power performance from the modules. We believe our system warranty periods are consistent with industry practice. Due to the long warranty period, we bear the risk of extensive warranty claims long after we have shipped product and recognized revenue. Although we make every attempt to qualify our vendors and their solar panels, solar panels have not been and cannot be tested in an environment simulating the 25-year warranty period. As a result of the foregoing, we may be subject to unexpected warranty expense, which in turn would harm our financial results.

Like other retailers, distributors and manufacturers of products that are used by consumers, we face an inherent risk of exposure to product liability claims in the event that the use of the solar power products in our SEFs results in injury. We may be subject to warranty and product liability claims in the event that our SEFs fail to perform as expected or if a failure of our solar power systems results, or is alleged to result, in bodily injury, property damage or other damages. 

11

Warranty and product liability claims may result from defects or quality issues in certain third-party technologies and components that we incorporate into our solar power systems, particularly solar cells and panels, over which we have no control. While our agreements with our suppliers generally include warranties, those provisions may not fully compensate us for any loss associated with third-party claims caused by defects or quality issues in these products. In the event we seek recourse through warranties, we will also be dependent on the creditworthiness and continued existence of these suppliers. Because we have largely used solar panels purchased from LDK for past projects and will continue to purchase solar panels from LDK, we may be exposed to increased risk that LDK may not perform under its warranties due to LDK’s liquidation and in the event LDK becomes insolvent.

We may be unable to achieve our goal of reducing the cost of installed solar systems, which may negatively impact our ability to sell our products in a competitive environment, resulting in lower revenues, gross margins and earnings.

To reduce the cost of installed solar systems, as compared against the current cost, we will have to achieve cost savings across the entire value chain from designing to manufacturing to distributing to selling and ultimately to installing solar systems. We have identified specific areas of potential savings and are pursuing targeted goals. However, such cost savings are especially dependent upon factors outside of our direct control, including the cost of raw materials, the cost of both manufacturing and installation labor, and the cost of financing systems. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts to lower the cost of installed solar systems, our revenues, gross margins and earnings may be negatively impacted.

Management has identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. Additionally, management may identify material weaknesses in the future that could adversely affect investor confidence, impair the value of our common stock and increase our cost of raising capital.

Management identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting and our Chief Executive Officer and our Chief Financial Officer concluded that our disclosure and internal controls and procedures were not effective at a reasonable assurance level as of December 31, 2013. There can be no assurance as to how quickly or effectively our remediation steps will remediate the material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting or that additional material weaknesses will not be identified in the future.

Any failure to remedy additional deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting that may be discovered in the future or to implement new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in the implementation of such controls, could harm our operating results, cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations or result in material misstatements in our financial statements. Any such failure could, in turn, affect the future ability of our management to certify that our internal control over our financial reporting is effective. Inferior internal control over financial reporting could also subject us to the scrutiny of the SEC and other regulatory bodies which could cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information and could subject us to civil or criminal penalties or shareholder litigation, which could have an adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.

In addition, if we or our independent registered public accounting firm identify additional deficiencies in our internal control over financial reporting, the disclosure of that fact, even if quickly remedied, could reduce the market’s confidence in our financial statements and harm our share price. Furthermore, additional deficiencies could result in future non-compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Such non-compliance could subject us to a variety of administrative sanctions, including review by the SEC or other regulatory authorities.

We may not be able to retain, recruit and train adequate management personnel.

Our continued operations are dependent upon our ability to identify, recruit and retain adequate management personnel to perform certain jobs such as engineering of solar systems, developing and maintaining internet based platforms for monitoring of SEFs and producing and facilitating the shipment of materials necessary for the installation of SEFs. We require trained graduates of varying levels and experience and a flexible work force of semi-skilled operators.

12

Natural disasters and other events outside our control can disrupt our business.

Our business and financial results may be affected by certain events that we cannot anticipate or that are beyond our control, such as natural or man-made disasters, national emergencies, significant labor strikes, work stoppages, political unrest, war or terrorist activities that could curtail production at our facilities and cause delayed deliveries and canceled orders. In addition, we purchase components, raw materials and other services from numerous suppliers, and even if our facilities were not directly affected by such events, we could be affected by interruptions at such suppliers. Such suppliers may be less likely than our own facilities to be able to quickly recover from such events and may be subject to additional risks such as financial problems that limit their ability to conduct their operations. We cannot assure you that we will have insurance to adequately compensate us for any of these events.

Risks Related to Our International Operations

Concerns regarding the European debt crisis and market perceptions concerning the instability of the Euro could adversely affect the Company’s business, results of operations and financing.

Concerns persist regarding the debt burden of certain Eurozone countries and their ability to meet future financial obligations, the overall stability of the Euro and the suitability of the Euro as a single currency given the diverse economic and political circumstances in individual Eurozone countries. These concerns, or market perceptions concerning these and related issues, could adversely affect the value of the Company’s Euro-denominated assets and obligations and lead to future economic slowdowns.

We face risks associated with international trade and currency exchange.

We transact business in a variety of currencies, including the U.S. dollar, the Chinese Yuan Renminbi (“RMB”), and the Euro. We make all sales in both U.S. dollars and the Euro and we incur operating expenses in RMB and in Euros. Changes in exchange rates would affect the value of deposits of currencies we hold. Fluctuations in exchange rates may affect product demand and may adversely affect our profitability in U.S. dollars to the extent the price of our solar modules and cost of raw materials, labor, and equipment is denominated in a foreign currency. We do not currently hedge against our exposure to currency risk described above.

Changes in the U.S. Federal and international tax law regarding foreign earnings could materially affect our future results.

There have been proposals to change U.S. tax laws that would significantly impact how U.S. corporations are taxed on foreign earnings. We earn a substantial portion of our income in foreign countries. Although we cannot predict whether or in what form any of these proposals might be enacted into law, if adopted they could have a material adverse impact on our liquidity, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.

Risks Related to our Common Stock

LDK controls us and may have conflicts of interest with other shareholders in the future.

LDK owns approximately 71% of our common stock on an as converted, fully-diluted basis. As a result, LDK will have significant control of the election of our directors and may influence our corporate and management policies. LDK also has sufficient voting power to amend our organizational documents. The interests of LDK may not coincide with the interests of other holders of our common stock. LDK may also pursue, for its own account, acquisition opportunities that may be complementary to our business, and as a result, those acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. So long as LDK continues to own a significant amount of the outstanding shares of our common stock, it will continue to be able to strongly influence or effectively control our decisions, including potential mergers or acquisitions, asset sales and other significant corporate transactions. Although we will operate separately, there are no assurances that conflicts will not arise in the future.

13

We have not paid and are unlikely to pay cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

We have not paid any cash dividends on our common stock and may not pay cash dividends in the future. Instead, we intend to apply earnings, if any, to the expansion and development of the business. Thus, the liquidity of your investment is dependent upon active trading of our stock in the market.

Any future financings and subsequent registration of common stock for resale will result in a significant number of shares of our common stock available for sale, and such sales could depress our common stock price. Further, no assurances can be given that we will not issue additional shares which will have the effect of diluting the equity interest of current investors. Moreover, sales of a substantial number of shares of common stock in any future public market could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and make it more difficult to sell shares of common stock at times and prices that either you or we determine to be appropriate.

We have significant “equity overhang” which could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities.

As of December 31, 2013, we had 198,214,456 shares of common stock outstanding. LDK holds 141,517,570 shares of common stock or approximately 71% of total common stock outstanding. The possibility that substantial amounts of our outstanding common stock may be sold by LDK or the perception that such sales could occur, often called “equity overhang“, could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities in the future.

The preparation of our consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires us to make estimates, judgments, and assumptions that may ultimately prove to be incorrect.

The accounting estimates and judgments that management must make in the ordinary course of business affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the periods presented. If the underlying estimates are ultimately proven to be incorrect, subsequent adjustments could have a material adverse effect on our operating results for the period or periods in which the change is identified.

Our shareholders may experience future dilution.

Our charter permits our board of directors, without shareholder approval, to authorize shares of preferred stock. The board of directors may classify or reclassify any preferred stock to set the preferences, rights and other terms of the classified or reclassified shares, including the issuance of shares of preferred stock that have preference rights over the common stock with respect to dividends, liquidation, voting and other matters or shares of common stock having special voting rights. Further, substantially all shares of common stock for which our outstanding stock options are exercisable are, once they have been purchased, eligible for immediate sale in the public market.

The issuance of additional shares of our capital stock or the exercise of stock options or warrants could be substantially dilutive to your shares and may negatively affect the market price of our common stock.

ITEM 1B     UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

None.

ITEM 2          PROPERTIES

Our corporate headquarters are located in Roseville, California in an office space of 2,797 square feet which is under a one year lease that expires in July 2014. We occupy approximately 4,000 square feet of office space in San Francisco, California, for financial reporting, legal and business development, under a lease that expires in January 2017. The Company retains 1,680 square feet of warehouse space in Rocklin, California under a lease that expires in July 2017.

14

ITEM 3          LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Except as set forth below, we are not a party to any pending legal proceeding. We are not aware of any pending legal proceeding to which any of our officers, directors, or any beneficial holders of 5% or more of our voting securities are a party that may have a material adverse effect to the Company’s business and consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

On July 26, 2013, we filed a complaint against Seashore Solar, Inc. and Seashore Solar Development, LLC (collectively “Seashore”) and KDC Solar RTC, LLC (“KDC”) in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County, under Docket No. SOM-C-12042-13. This lawsuit relates to a solar power project in Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey (the “project”). We sold solar panels to Seashore for use in the Project. The unpaid portion of the purchase price for the panels is approximately $2,800,000. We also entered into an EPC agreement with Seashore with regard to the Project. Seashore sold the Project to KDC and is no longer in a position to satisfy its obligations under the EPC agreement. We are seeking damages from Seashore for the unpaid solar panels and breach of the EPC agreement. The parties are in the process of negotiating a settlement agreement.

In November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. SGT currently has insufficient funds to fund the SGT liquidation process. In the event SGT does not receive additional funds needed to proceed with the liquidation, SGT will likely be forced to file for bankruptcy protection. From time to time, we also are involved in various other legal and regulatory proceedings arising in the normal course of business. While we cannot predict the occurrence or outcome of these proceedings with certainty, we do not believe that an adverse result in any pending legal or regulatory proceeding, individually or in the aggregate, would be material to our consolidated financial condition or cash flows; however, an unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for a specific interim period or year.

ITEM 4          MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

Not applicable.

PART II

ITEM 5          MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market Information

Our common stock began trading on the Over the Counter Bulletin Board (OTCBB) under the symbol “SOPW.OB” on September 25, 2007. The quarterly high and low bid information in U.S. dollars on the OTCBB of our common shares during the periods indicated are as follows:

	High Bid		Low Bid
Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2013
Fourth Quarter to December 31, 2013	$	0.42	$	0.06
Third Quarter to September 30, 2013	$	0.22	$	0.03
Second Quarter to June 30, 2013	$	0.06	$	0.03
First Quarter to March 31, 2013	$	0.12	$	0.05
Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2012
Fourth Quarter to December 31, 2012	$	0.10	$	0.05
Third Quarter to September 30, 2012	$	0.30	$	0.09
Second Quarter to June 30, 2012	$	0.54	$	0.20
First Quarter to March 31, 2012	$	0.70	$	0.32

15

These Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board bid quotations reflect inter-dealer prices, without retail mark-up, mark-down or commission and may not represent actual transactions. On December 31, 2013, the last reported sale price for our common stock was $0.17 per share.

As of April 4, 2014 we had approximately 66 holders of record of our common stock.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock and do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our common stock in the foreseeable future.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

None.

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans

On November 15, 2006, subject to approval of the Stockholders, the Company adopted the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan reserving 9% of the outstanding shares of common stock of the Company (“2006 Plan”). On February 7, 2007, our stockholders approved the 2006 Plan reserving 9% of the outstanding shares of common stock of the Company pursuant to the Definitive Proxy on Schedule 14A filed with the Commission on January 22, 2007.

The following table provides aggregate information as of December 31, 2013 with respect to all compensation plans (including individual compensation arrangements) under which equity securities are authorized for issuance:

Plan Category	Number of Securities to be issued upon exercise of of outstanding options, warrants and rights	Weighted-average exercise price of outstanding options, warrants and rights		Number of securities Remaining available for future issuance under equity compensation plans (excluding securities reflected in the first column)
Equity Compensation Plans approved by security holders	7,332,000	$	0.24	10,370,106	(1)
Equity Compensation Plans not approved by security holders	—		—	—
TOTAL:	7,332,000	$	0.24	10,370,106	(1)

(1) Includes number of shares of common stock reserved under the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Equity Plan”) as of December 31, 2013, which reserves 9% of the outstanding shares of common stock of the Company, plus outstanding warrants.

Issuer Purchase of Equity Securities

None.

ITEM 6.     SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Pursuant to Item 301(c) of Regulation S-K., the Company, as a smaller reporting company, is not required to provide the information required by this item.

16

ITEM 7 — MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following discussion highlights what we believe are the principal factors that have affected our financial condition and results of operations, as well as our liquidity and capital resources for the periods described. This discussion should be read in conjunction with our financial statements and related notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report. This discussion contains “forward-looking statements“, which can be identified by the use of words such as “expects“, “plans“, “will“, “may“, “anticipates“, “believes“, “should“, “intends“, “estimates” and other words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements are subject to risks and uncertainties that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, without limitation, the risks described in Part I on page 4 of this Annual Report, and the risks described in Item 1A, Page 7 above.

The following discussion is presented on a consolidated basis, and analyzes our financial condition and results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.

Unless the context indicates or suggests otherwise reference to “we”, “our”, “us” and the “Company” in this section refers to the consolidated operations of Solar Power, Inc.

Overview

Solar Power, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively the “Company”) is a global solar energy facility (“SEF”) developer offering high-quality, low-cost distributed generation and utility-scale SEF development services. Primarily, we partner with developers around the world who hold large portfolios of SEF projects for whom we serve as co-developer and engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) contractor. In addition to building SEFs using products manufactured by LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), our parent company, we also sell solar modules and balance of system components manufactured by third party vendors to other integrators in the U.S., Asian, and European markets. In addition to designing, engineering and constructing large-scale SEFs, we also provide long-term operations and maintenance (“O&M”) services through our proprietary O&M program SPIGuardian. This service program provides a comprehensive suite of services that engage upon a facility’s commissioning to provide performance monitoring, system reporting, preventative maintenance and full warranty support over the anticipated life of the SEF. While we still consider our O&M services to be within our core competencies, we have obtained third party outsourcing for these services to assist in the reduction of operating expenses.

On March 31, 2011, LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”) obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. by making a significant investment in our business that provided working capital and broader relationships that allowed us to more aggressively pursue commercial and utility projects globally. At December 31, 2013, LDK owns approximately 71% of the Company’s outstanding Common Stock. LDK’s modules have been used in the majority of the systems we produce; however, we maintain relationships with other module manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of modules. In February 2014, LDK announced that LDK made a filing with the court for the appointment of joint provisional liquidators in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues. See Note 2 — Going Concern Considerations and Management’s Plan of the Notes of the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion related to the accounts payables with LDK.

In June 2012, we acquired Solar Green Technology S.p.A. (“SGT”), a SEF developer headquartered in Milan, Italy, from LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A (“LDK Europe”) and the two founders of SGT. Because LDK Europe is a wholly-owned subsidiary of our parent, LDK, the acquisition was treated as a transaction between entities under common control. LDK obtained a controlling interest in SGT on July 20, 2009. LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011. As such, the Company recognized the assets and liabilities of SGT (the accounting receiving entity) at their historical carrying values in accordance with U.S. GAAP and recast the assets and liabilities of the legacy Solar Power, Inc. entity (the transferring entity) to reflect carrying value of the parent, LDK, which were stepped up to fair value on March 31, 2011 upon LDK obtaining a controlling interested in Solar Power, Inc. Upon LDK acquiring its controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011, the equity of the new reporting entity for the combined financial statements of Solar Power, Inc. and SGT reflected the Preferred and Common Stock of Solar Power, Inc. and associated additional paid-in capital and SGT’s retained earnings (accumulated deficit) and foreign currency translation at March 31, 2011. Adjustments to eliminate the capital share accounts of SGT were recorded to additional paid-in capital. See Note 5 — Acquisition of Solar Green Technology of the Notes of the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion related to the accounts payables with LDK. As a result of the transaction, in July 2012, we issued 9,771,223 shares of its Common Stock to LDK Europe, a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK, wherein LDK retained ownership of approximately 71% of our outstanding Common Stock as of December 31, 2012. Due to SGT’s continuing loss position and our liquidity issue, in November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. As a result of these actions, the Company deconsolidated SGT on December 30, 2013 when the Company ceased to have a controlling financial interest in SGT. The Company recognized a gain on deconsolidation of $3.5 million which was recognized in other income in the statement of operations as the liquidation is a run-off of operations. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital. SGT currently has insufficient funds to fund the SGT liquidation process. In the event SGT does not receive additional funds needed to proceed with the liquidation, SGT will likely be forced to file for bankruptcy protection. See Note 6 — Deconsolidation of Solar Green Technology of the Notes of the Consolidated Financial Statements.

17

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

Principles of Consolidation — The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of the Company and companies in which the Company has a controlling interest. Intercompany transactions have been eliminated. The equity method of accounting is used for investments in affiliates and other joint ventures over which the Company has significant influence but does not have effective control. Investments in affiliates in which the Company cannot exercise significant influence are accounted for on the cost method.

Management also evaluates whether an interest is a variable interest entity and whether the Company is the primary beneficiary. Consolidation is required if both of these criteria are met. The Company does not have any variable interest entities requiring consolidation.

If the entity is not considered a variable interest entity, it is treated as a voting interest entity, and the Company applies the guidance of ASC 810-20 – “Control of Partnerships and Similar Entities”, in determining whether the entity should be consolidated. The Company does not hold interests in any partnerships or similar entities requiring consolidation.

Equity Method – Investee companies that are not consolidated, but over which the Company exercises significant influence, are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Whether or not the Company exercises significant influence with respect to an Investee depends on an evaluation of several factors, including, among others, representation on the Investee company’s board of directors and ownership level. Under the equity method of accounting, an Investee company’s accounts are not reflected within the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and Statements of Operations; however, the Company’s share of the earnings or losses of the Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Equity loss—share of Investee company losses’’ in the Consolidated Statements of Operations since the activities of the investee are closely aligned with the operations of our business segment. The Company’s carrying value in an equity method Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Investment in affiliates’’ in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. We evaluate our equity method investments whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may be impaired. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. We determined the fair value of our investment in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC (the “LLC”) was $7.5 million based on an income approach applying discounted cash flows to measure the fair value using a 10% discount rate. We also used a market approach by comparing the fair value to other similar sized MW photovoltaic solar electricity projects taking into consideration the expected time and cost to complete the project. As a result, we recorded a $7.5 million impairment charge in the Consolidated Statement of Operations during the year ended December 31, 2013. There were no earnings or losses recorded from our equity method investment.

Revenue recognition

Product sales — Revenue on product sales is recognized when there is evidence of an arrangement, title and risk of ownership have passed (generally upon delivery), the price to the buyer is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. We make determination of our customer’s credit worthiness at the time we accept their initial order. For cable, wire and mechanical assembly sales, there are no formal customer acceptance requirements or further obligations related to our assembly services once we ship our products. Customers do not have a general right of return on products shipped therefore we make no provisions for returns.

Construction Contracts — Revenue on photovoltaic system construction contracts is generally recognized using the percentage of completion method of accounting, unless we cannot make reasonably dependable estimates of the costs to complete the contract or the contact value is not fixed, in which case we would use the completed contract method. At the end of each period, the Company measures the cost incurred on each project and compares the result against its estimated total costs at completion. The percent of cost incurred determines the amount of revenue to be recognized. Payment terms are generally defined by the contract and as a result may not match the timing of the costs incurred by the Company and the related recognition of revenue. Such differences are recorded as costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts or billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts. The Company determines its customer’s credit worthiness at the time the order is accepted. Sudden and unexpected changes in customer’s financial condition could put recoverability at risk.

18

The percentage-of-completion method requires the use of various estimates, including, among others, the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. Contract revenues and contract costs to be recognized are dependent on the accuracy of estimates, including direct material and labor costs and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, tools, repairs, and depreciation costs. We have a history of making reasonable estimates of the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. However, due to uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, it is possible that actual contract revenues and completion costs may vary from estimates. Under the completed-contract method, contract costs are recorded to a construction in progress account and cash received is recorded to a liability account during the periods of construction. All revenues, costs, and profits are recognized in operations upon completion of the contract. A contract is considered complete and revenue recognized when all costs except insignificant items have been incurred and final acceptance has been received from the customer and receivables are deemed to be collectible. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts, if any, are recognized in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable.

The asset, “Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts” represents revenues recognized in excess of amounts billed. The liability, “Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts“, represents billings in excess of revenues recognized.

For those projects where the Company is considered to be the owner, the project is accounted for under the rules of real estate accounting. In the event of a sale, the method of revenue recognition is determined by considering the extent of the buyer’s initial and continuing investment and the nature and the extent of the Company’s continuing involvement. Generally, revenue is recognized at the time of title transfer if the buyer’s investment is sufficient to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property and the Company does not have a substantial continuing involvement with the property. When continuing involvement is substantial and not temporary, the Company applies the financing method, whereby the asset remains on the balance sheet and the proceeds received are recorded as a financing obligation. When a sale is not recognized due to continuing involvement and the financing method is applied, the Company records revenue and expenses related to the underlying operations of the asset in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

For any arrangements containing multiple deliverables not covered under the revenue guidance for real estate or for long-term construction contracts, we analyze each activity within the sales arrangement to ensure that we adhere to the separation guidelines for multiple-element arrangements. We allocate revenue for any transactions involving multiple elements to each unit of accounting based on our best estimate of the selling price, and recognize revenue for each unit of accounting when the revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Product and Performance Warranties — The Company offers the industry standard of 25 years for our solar modules and industry standard five years on inverter and balance of system components. Due to the warranty period, we bear the risk of extensive warranty claims long after we have shipped product and recognized revenue. In our cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business, historically our warranty claims have not been material. In our solar photovoltaic business, our greatest warranty exposure is in the form of product replacement. Until the third quarter of 2007, the Company purchased its solar panels from third-party suppliers and since the third-party warranties are consistent with industry standards we considered our financial exposure to warranty claims immaterial. Certain photovoltaic construction contracts entered into during the year ended December 31, 2007 included provisions under which the Company agreed to provide warranties to the buyer, and during the quarter ended September 30, 2007 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company installed its own manufactured solar panels. As a result, the Company recorded the provision for the estimated warranty exposure on these contracts within cost of sales. Since the Company does not have sufficient historical data to estimate its exposure, we have looked to our own historical data in combination with historical data reported by other solar system installers and manufacturers. The Company installs panels manufactured by unrelated third parties and its parent LDK Solar Co., Ltd. We provide their pass through warranty and reserve for unreimbursed costs, such as labor, material and transportation costs to replace panels and balance of system components provided by third-party manufacturers. To the extent our estimate of warranty cost is inaccurate we may incur additional costs to satisfy our contractual obligations, and those costs may be material to our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Because we have largely used solar panels purchased from LDK for past projects and will continue to purchase solar panels from LDK, we may be exposed to increased risk that LDK may not perform under its warranties due to LDK’s liquidation and in the event LDK becomes insolvent.

19

Inventories — Certain factors could impact the realizable value of our inventory, so we continually evaluate the recoverability based on assumptions about customer demand and market conditions. The evaluation may take into consideration historic usage, expected demand, anticipated sales price, product obsolescence, customer concentrations, product merchantability and other factors. The reserve or impairment is equal to the difference between the cost of inventory and the estimated market value based upon assumptions about future demand and market conditions. If actual market conditions are less favorable than those projected by management, inventory reserves or impairments may be required that could negatively impact our gross margin and operating results.

Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, determined by the first in first out cost method. Work-in-progress and finished goods inventories consist of raw materials, direct labor and overhead associated with the manufacturing process. Provisions are made for obsolete or slow-moving inventory based on management estimates. Inventories are impaired based on the difference between the cost of inventories and the net realizable value based upon estimates about future demand from customers and specific customer requirements on certain projects. Inventory impairment charges establish a new cost basis for inventory and charges are not subsequently reversed to income even if circumstances later suggest that increased carrying amounts are recoverable.

Stock based compensation — The Company measures the stock-based compensation expense of share-based compensation arrangements based on the grant-date fair value and recognizes the costs in the financial statements over the employee requisite service period.

Determining the appropriate fair value model and calculating the fair value of share-based payment awards require the input of highly subjective assumptions, including the expected life of the share-based payment awards and stock price volatility. The assumptions used in calculating the fair value of share-based payment awards represent management’s best estimates, but these estimates involve inherent uncertainties and the application of management judgment. As a result, if factors change and we use different assumptions, our stock-based compensation expense could be materially different in the future. In addition, we are required to estimate the expected forfeiture rate and only recognize expense for those shares expected to vest. If our actual forfeiture rate is materially different from our estimate, the stock-based compensation expense could be significantly different from what we have recorded in the current period.

Allowance for doubtful accounts — The Company regularly monitors and assesses the risk of not collecting amounts owed to the Company by customers. This evaluation is based upon a variety of factors, including an analysis of amounts current and past due along with relevant history and facts particular to the customer. It requires the Company to make significant estimates and changes in facts and circumstances could result in material changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts.

Income taxes — The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting and tax reporting bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon the weight of available evidence, including expected future earnings. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion, or all, of a deferred tax asset will not be realized. Should we determine that we would be able to realize deferred tax assets in the future in excess of the net recorded amount, we would record an adjustment to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance. This adjustment would increase income in the period such determination is made.

20

Profit from non-U.S. activities is subject to local country taxes but not subject to U.S. tax until repatriated to the U.S. It is our intention to permanently reinvest these earnings outside the U.S. The calculation of tax liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex global tax regulations. We recognize potential liabilities for anticipated tax audit issues in the U.S. and other tax jurisdictions based on our estimate of whether, and the extent to which, additional taxes will more likely than not be due. If payment of these amounts ultimately proves to be unnecessary, the reversal of the liabilities may result in tax benefits being recognized in the period when we determine the liabilities are no longer necessary. If the estimate of tax liabilities proves to be less than the ultimate tax assessment, a further charge to expense may result.

The Company recognizes uncertain tax positions in its financial statements when it concludes that a tax position is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination based solely on its technical merits. Only after a tax position passes the first step of recognition will measurement be required. Under the measurement step, the tax benefit is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is more likely than not to be realized upon effective settlement. This is determined on a cumulative probability basis.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income—Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, which requires entities to provide information about the amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component. In addition, entities are required to present, either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or in the notes, significant amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by the respective line items of net income but only if the amount reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified to net income in its entirety in the same reporting period. For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income, entities are required to cross-reference to other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are included in Note 4.

In March 2013, FASB issued ASU No. 2013-05, Foreign Currency Matters—Parent’s Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity, which allows an entity to release cumulative translation adjustment into net income when a parent either sells a part or all of its investment in a foreign entity or no longer holds a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary or group of assets that is a nonprofit activity or a business within a foreign entity. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are included in Note 6.

In April 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-07, Liquidation Basis of Accounting, which require an entity to use the liquidation basis of accounting to present its financial statements when it determines that liquidation is imminent, unless the liquidation is the same as that under the plan specified in an entity’s governing documents created at its inception. Liquidation is imminent when the likelihood is remote that the entity will return from liquidation and either (a) a plan for liquidation is approved by the person or persons with the authority to make such a plan effective and the likelihood is remote that the execution of the plan will be blocked by other parties or (b) a plan for liquidation is being imposed by other forces (for example, involuntary bankruptcy). These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Entities should apply the requirements prospectively from the day that liquidation becomes imminent. Management is currently evaluating the impact of this amendment on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-11, Income Taxes—Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists, which provides that an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion thereof, should be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, except to the extent that a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available at the reporting date to settle any additional income taxes that would result from disallowance of a tax position, or the tax law does not require the entity to use, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, then the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented as a liability. These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Management does not expect the adoption of these changes to have a material impact on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

21

Results of Operations

Comparison of the year ended December 31, 2013 to the year ended December 31, 2012

Net sales — Net sales were $42.6 million and $100.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, a decrease of $57.4 million, or 57.4%. Included in net sales for the year ended December 31, 2012 were related party sales to LDK, North Palm Springs Investments, LLC (“NPSLLC”), a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK Solar USA, Inc., and Terrasol of $35.5 million, primarily consisting of solar development project costs. The decrease in net sales for the year ended December 31, 2013 over the comparative period was primarily due to a decline in utility-scale solar projects in the U.S. We expect that net sales will remain consistent with year 2013 levels before ramping up again in the future as new project development is on hold while existing projects in process are completed and collections are achieved to provide further working capital for any new projects. Absent third party debt financing for project construction, future development will be dependent on internal cash flow.

Cost of goods sold — Cost of goods sold was $45.4 million (106.5% of net sales) and $91.4 million (91.4% of net sales) for the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, a decrease of $46.0 million, or 50.3%. Cost of goods sold for the year ended December 31, 2012 includes related party costs of goods sold to LDK, NPSLLC and Terrasol of $32.6 million and a provision for losses on contracts of $2.7 million due to costs incurred on the Greek project portfolio that exceeded the discounted present value of the contract. Cost of goods sold for the year ended December 31, 2013 was higher than net sales also due to the EPC arrangement on the Greek project portfolio exceeded discounted present value of the contract and a provision for losses on contracts of $2.8 million due to cost incurred on the Mountain Creek project portfolio that exceed of revenue.

Gross (losses) margins were (6.5)% and 8.6% for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Gross margins (losses) attributable to non-related parties were (6.5)% and 13.0% for years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The decrease in gross margin from non-related parties for the year ended December 31, 2013 over that of the comparative period was due to higher margin EPC arrangements executed in 2012. Gross margins attributable to related parties were 8.2% for the year ended December 31, 2012.

General and administrative expenses — General and administrative expenses were $17.5 million (41.1% of net sales) and $13.1 million (13.1% of net sales) for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, an increase of $4.4 million, or 34.2%. The increase in general and administrative expenses for the year ended December 31, 2013 over the comparative period was primarily due to increases in bad debt expense of $8.9 million offset by decrease in professional services of $1.6 million primarily related to the SGT transaction in year 2012, personnel-related costs of $1.4 million, rent expense of $0.3 million, loss on disposal fixed assets $0.6 million. The significant increase in bad debt expense during 2013 was primarily attributable to a few specific projects where we determined the customers were either unwilling or unable to pay the outstanding balances due. We expect that general and administrative expenses, specifically personnel-related costs and professional services, will scale downward from the current period due to our recent cost reduction actions.

Sales, marketing and customer service expense — Sales, marketing and customer service expenses were $2.1 million (4.8% of net sales) and $10.6 million (10.6% of net sales) for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, a decrease of $8.6 million, or 80.7%. The decrease in sales, marketing and customer service expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 over the comparative period was primarily due to decreases in commission expense of $4.6 million, write-offs of $1.3 million related to non-refundable land deposit for certain solar projects in year 2012, which were reassessed and determined to no longer be viable for development, professional service of $0.6 million and personnel-related costs of $1.5 million. We expect that sales, marketing and customer service expenses, specifically personnel-related costs and commission expense, will remain consistent with year 2013 levels before ramping in-line with increases in net sales, as noted above.

22

Engineering, design and product management expense — Engineering, design and product management expenses were $1.8 million (4.1% of net sales) and $2.6 million (2.6% of net sales) for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, an decrease of $0.8 million, or 33.2%. The decrease in engineering, design and product management costs for the year ended December 31, 2013 over the comparative period was primarily due to a decrease in consulting and personnel-related costs of $0.8 million. We expect these expenses to decline due to lower personnel-related costs in connection with our recent decisions to outsource design and engineering services.

Impairment charge — For the year ended December 31, 2013, no impairment of goodwill was recorded.

In December 2013 we entered into an exchange and release agreement with KDC and agreed to exchange our $15.0 million note receivable due to us from KDC under the EPC agreement for construction of the Mountain Creek Project in exchange for a 64.50% limited ownership interest in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC (the “LLC”). As a result of this transaction, we determined the fair value of our investment in the LLC was $7.5 million based on an income approach applying discounted cash flows to measure the fair value using a 10% discount rate. We also used a market approach by comparing the fair value to other similar sized MW photovoltaic solar electricity projects taking into consideration the expected time and cost to complete the project. As a result, we recorded a $7.5 million impairment charge during the three months ended December 31, 2013.

During the three months ended September 30, 2012, due primarily to the recent reduction in the Company’s market capitalization, our market value was significantly below our book value, thus triggering an impairment analysis. As a result of this analysis, we recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $5.2 million. As such, the balance of goodwill as of December 31, 2012 was zero.

During the three months ended December 31, 2012, we determined that the carrying value of certain intangible assets related to customer relationships in our former cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business was no longer recoverable and therefore recognized an impairment loss of $0.1 million.

During the second quarter of 2012, we recorded an impairment charge of $0.7 million to reduce the carrying amount of the asset held for sale to the revised estimate of fair value less cost to sell. During the second quarter of 2012, subsequent to the impairment, this asset was sold to a related party.

Interest expense — Interest expense was $4.3 million and $4.1 million, respectively, for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. The increase in interest expense of $0.2 million, or 6.3%, for the year ended December 31, 2013, over the comparative period was due to an increase in the interest rate of the line of credit from Cathay Bank which offset by repayment of principal balance. We expect that interest expense will continue to fluctuate in future periods depending on the utilization of debt financing in our operations.

Interest income — Interest income was $1.7 million and $2.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The decrease in interest income of approximately $0.8 million over the comparative period was due to the collection notes receivable for certain EPC contracts between the customers and the Company. We expect that we will continue to earn interest income at similar levels in the future until the notes are repaid by the customers. We do not expect to lend to new customers in the future, as such interest income is expected to fluctuate depending on the principal balance of the currently outstanding notes receivable.

Other income(expense) — Other income, net, was $2.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 and Other expense, net was $0.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, respectively. Other income, net, for the year ended December 31, 2013 increased by $3.0 million from the comparative period mainly due to the gains from the deconsolidation of SGT. Excluding the deconsolidation gain, the balance of other income (expense) is primarily related to currency gains and losses.

Income tax expense — The Company had a provision for/(benefit from) income taxes of $0.8 million and ($0.1) million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. The Company is currently in a net cumulative loss position and has significant net operating loss carry forwards. The provision for income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2013 was primarily the result of the SGT liquidation and the related charge off of the asset created by the elimination of the intercompany gain created by the sale of an asset between the Company and SGT during 2012. The income tax benefit for the year ended December 31, 2012 primarily related to our Italy and China support entities.

Liquidity

A summary of the sources and uses of cash and cash equivalents is as follows:

	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2013			2012
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities		11,212		$	(14,397	)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities		5,669			(7,345	)
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities		(33,599	)		14,440
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash		(74	)		602
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents	$	(16,792	)	$	(6,700	)

23

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, we had $1.0 million and $17.8 million, respectively, in cash and cash equivalents.

Operating Activities – Net cash provided by operating activities of $11.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 which resulted primarily from the decreases in costs and estimated earnings in excess of billing on uncompleted contracts of $28.7 million, decreases in construction in progress of $16.0 million, decreases in accounts receivable of $15.3 million, increases in accounts payable of $2.4 million, decreases in inventories of $1.6 million. These amounts were partially offset by the $32.2 million net loss which includes a gain on deconsolidation of SGT of $3.5 million and non-cash activity related to the solar system subject to financing obligation of $1.2 million, offset in part by non-cash items consisting of depreciation and amortization of $1.9 million, bad debt expense of $9.3 million, impairment charges of $7.5 million and impairment of project assets of $2.8 million. Also reducing the cash provided by operating activities were increases in notes receivable of $27.9 million, decreases in accrued liabilities of $4.1 million and decreases in billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts of $4.1.

Investing Activities – Net cash provided by investing activities of $5.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 resulted primarily from the collection of notes receivables.

Financing Activities – Net cash used in financing activities was $33.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 and resulted primarily from principal payment on lines of credit and construction loans.

Capital Resources and Material Known Facts on Liquidity

As of December 31, 2013, we had $1.0 million in cash and cash equivalents, $0.4 million of restricted cash held in our name in interest bearing accounts, 44.6 million in accounts and notes receivable of which $3.9 million is due from our parent, LDK.

We incurred a net loss of $32.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 and have an accumulated deficit of $56.1 million as of December 31, 2013. Working capital levels have decreased significantly from $22.4 million at December 31, 2012 to negative $36.6 at December 31, 2013. In February 2014, the Company’s parent company, LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), who owns approximately 71% of the Company’s outstanding Common Stock, announced that LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues. It is unknown at this time if LDK’s joint provisional liquidation will require or result in the Company disposing of assets in an orderly manner, in a liquidation scenario or at all. If the Company is required to dispose of assets to satisfy LDK’s creditors, it could result in the Company incurring losses. These factors raise substantial doubt as to our ability to continue as a going concern. While our management believes that we have a plan to satisfy liquidity requirements for a reasonable period of time, there is no assurance that our plan will be successfully implemented. We are experiencing the following risks and uncertainties in the business:

• As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company has accounts payable due to LDK of $50.9 million and $51.8 million, respectively. All of the accounts payable due to LDK are currently past due and payable to LDK. Although there are no formal agreements, LDK has verbally indicated that it will not demand payment until the receivable from the customer has been collected. In light of LDK's recent filing for liquidation, it is unclear whether or not LDK will be able to continue to allow the Company to defer repayment to LDK. Should LDK change its position and demand payment for the past due amount prior to collection of the related receivable from the customer, the Company does not have the ability to make the payment currently due without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. With LDK as a majority shareholder, the significant risks and uncertainties associated with their filing for liquidation by LDK could have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of Solar Power, Inc. as well as indicate an inability for LDK to support the Company's business.

24 

• On March 25, 2014, Solar Power, Inc. (the “Company”) received notice from Cathay Bank stating that the Company is in default under the Business Loan Agreement dated December 26, 2011 and as amended on January 2, 2013 (the “Loan Agreement”) due to (i) the Company failing to make payments as due pursuant to the Loan Agreement and pursuant to the forbearance agreements entered into between the parties, and (ii) the guarantor, LDK, filing an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands on February 24, 2014. Based on these events of default, Cathay Bank has accelerated the entire principal balance due under the Loan Agreement. The Company owes approximately $4.25 million under the Loan Agreement, plus accrued interest and fees. The balance under the Loan Agreement will continue to incur interest at 11% per year. If the Company cannot remedy the default, the Company does not have the ability to make the payments without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. Since the loan balance is secured by the Company’s assets, Cathay Bank may foreclose on the collateral securing the loan which could significantly impact our business and our financial results.

• China Development Bank (“CDB”) has provided financing for construction and project financing on certain development projects in the past. They have also executed non-binding term sheets for other projects, but there is no assurance that the projects in process will be funded. CDB has been financing the Company’s projects primarily as a result of the fact that the Company’s majority shareholder is LDK and CDB has a long term relationship with LDK. Due to LDK’s financial difficulties, certain financing of the Company’s projects have been delayed. If CDB will no longer provide financing for the projects, the Company will need to seek construction financing from other sources which could be very difficult given the Company’s financial condition and LDK’s majority ownership of the Company. The company has completed projects in Greece with a customer that is requesting debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to six years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated. The company has also completed an additional commercial scale project in New Jersey with KDC Solar, which is currently seeking debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding notes receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to fifteen years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated.

• A key term of existing project financing with CDB is that the Company must use solar panels manufactured by LDK. Currently, however, LDK has demanded payment in advance in order to procure their solar panels. If the Company is unable to make advance payments required, the Company has and will continue to need to request its customers to make the required cash payments for the LDK solar panels to be utilized in projects under development. The Company continues to maintain relationships with other solar panel manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of solar panels.

25

• With LDK as a majority shareholder, the significant risks and uncertainties noted at LDK could have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of Solar Power, Inc., as well as indicate an inability for LDK to support the Company’s business.

The significant risks and uncertainties described above have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of the Company and raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management has made changes to the Company’s business model by managing cash flow through cost cutting measures, securing project financing before commencing further project development, and requesting that the Company’s customers make cash payments for solar panels for projects under development. If the LDK or Cathay demands payment of amounts owed by the Company prior to collection of the related receivables, management plans to obtain additional debt or equity financing. There is no assurance that management’s plans to accelerate the collection of outstanding receivables or to obtain additional debt or equity financing will be successfully implemented, or implemented on terms favorable to the Company. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had $1.0 million in cash and cash equivalents. The Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities or any other adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

The current economic conditions in the U.S. and Europe, the tariffs imposed on Chinese-manufactured solar panels imported into the U.S., and the reductions of solar incentives in Europe have presented challenges to us in generating the revenues and/or margins necessary to maintain positive working capital. Any new and existing projects requires additional increases in working capital as we incur significant costs from the time EPC agreements are executed until project completion or customer payment. Additionally, our revenues are highly dependent on third party financing for these projects. As a result, revenue recognition and collections remain difficult to predict and we cannot assure shareholders and potential investors that we will be successful in generating positive cash flows from operations. As the timing of revenue recognition and collection of related receivables are unpredictable, our strategy is to manage spending. This effort continues, as reflected in our revised business strategy as announced in the third quarter 2012 and continued reduction of our workforce in 2013, in order to focus on our core expertise of maximizing operating efficiencies and financial resources. Further cost reduction measures may be implemented by management as deemed necessary.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

At December 31, 2013, we did not have any transactions, obligations or relationships that could be considered off-balance sheet arrangements.

ITEM 7A.     QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

Pursuant to Item 305(e) of Regulation S-K., the Company, as a smaller reporting company, is not required to provide the information required by this item.

ITEM 8.        FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

The Financial Statements that constitute Item 8 are filed as a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K are our Consolidated Financial Statements, beginning on page F-1.

26

ITEM 9.        CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

None.

ITEM 9A.     CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

Our executive management is responsible for establishing and maintaining a system of disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15 and 15d-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”)) designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports that we file or submit under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms. Disclosure controls and procedures include, without limitation, controls and procedures designed to ensure that information required to be disclosed by an issuer in the reports that it files or submits under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the issuer’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, or persons performing similar functions, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Our executive management concluded that, because of the material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting discussed below, our disclosure controls and procedures were not effective as of December 31, 2013. Notwithstanding the material weakness discussed below, our executive management has concluded that the consolidated financial statements included in this Form 10-K present fairly, in all material respects, our financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States.

Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f). Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. Internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures which (a) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the Company; (b) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the Company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the Company; and (c) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, assessed the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in the 1992 Internal Control-Integrated Framework. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of the Company’s annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Based on management’s assessment, including consideration of the control deficiencies discussed below, management has concluded that the Company’s internal control over financial reporting was not effective as of December 31, 2013, due to the fact that there were material weaknesses in its internal control over financial reporting.

27

Specifically, we identified the following control deficiency in our internal controls that constitute material weaknesses:

● We instituted a number of cost cutting measures and significantly reduced the number of personnel in our accounting department which led to a lack of segregation of duties. The lack of segregation of duties prohibited a timely review at an appropriate level of precision over routine and significant transactions. Additionally, the Company does not have appropriate control and procedures in place with respect to the disclosure of and the accounting for material complex and non-routine transactions. During the year ended 2013, material audit adjustments were posted related to the deconsolidation of Solar Green Technology and investment in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC. In addition, the Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2013 was restated due to errors in cash flow classification resulting from complex and non-routine transactions. Furthermore, documentation for certain journal entry transactions had been misplaced due to the turnover of personnel.

This annual report does not include an attestation report of the Company’s registered public accounting firm regarding internal control over financial reporting. Management’s report was not subject to attestation by the Company’s registered public accounting firm pursuant to rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission that permit the Company (non-accelerated filer) to provide only management’s report in this annual report.

Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting

Other than the changes resulting in the material weaknesses described above, there have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act) during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

ITEM 9B.     OTHER INFORMATION

None.

PART III

ITEM 10.     DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

The information required by this Item will be included in and is hereby incorporated by reference from our Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. We have adopted a Code of Ethics applicable to all employees, including our CEO and CFO. A copy of the Code of Ethics is available at www.spisolar.com.

ITEM 11.     EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

The information required by this Item will be included in and is hereby incorporated by reference from our Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

ITEM 12.     SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The information required by this Item will be included in and is hereby incorporated by reference from our Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

ITEM 13.     CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

The information required by this Item will be included in and is hereby incorporated by reference from our Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

ITEM 14.     PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTING FEES AND SERVICES

The information required by this Item will be included in and is hereby incorporated by reference from our Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

28

PART IV

ITEM 15.     EXHIBITS, FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

Exhibit No.	Description
2.1	Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of January 25, 2006 between Welund Fund, Inc. (Delaware) and Welund Fund, Inc. (Nevada) (1)
2.2	Agreement and Plan of Merger by and among Solar Power, Inc., a California corporation, Welund Acquisition Corp., a Nevada corporation, and Welund Fund, Inc., a Nevada corporation dated as of August 23, 2006 (2)
2.3	First Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger dated October 4, 2006 (3)
2.4	Second Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger dated December 1, 2006 (4)
2.5	Third Amendment to Agreement and Plan of Merger dated December 21, 2006 (5)
2.6	Agreement of Merger by and between Solar Power, Inc., a California corporation, Solar Power, Inc., a Nevada corporation and Welund Acquisition Corp., a Nevada corporation dated December 29, 2006 (7)
2.7	Agreement of Merger by and between Solar Power, Inc., a Nevada corporation and Solar Power, Inc., a California corporation, dated February 14, 2007 (6)
3.1	Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation (6)
3.2	Amendment of Amended and Restated Articles (17)
3.3	Bylaws (6)
3.4	Specimen (7)
3.5	Certificate of Determination of Rights, Preferences, Privileges and Restrictions of the Series A Preferred Stock of Solar Power (12)
10.1	Form of Securities Purchase Agreement, by and among Solar Power, Inc. and the purchasers named therein (9)
10.2	Form of Registration Rights Agreement, by and among Solar Power, Inc. and the purchasers named therein (9)
10.3	Loan Agreement with Five Star Bank dated June 1, 2010 (10)
10.4	Deposit Account Pledge Agreement dated June 22, 2010 (11)
10.5	Intercreditor Agreement dated June 22, 2010 (11)
10.6	Acknowledgment, Confirmation and Estoppel dated June 22, 2010 (11)
10.7	Continuing Guaranty by Steven C. Kircher dated June 22, 2010 (11)
10.8	Continuing Guaranty by Kircher Family Irrevocable Trust dated June 22, 2010 (11)
10.9	Stock Pledge Agreement by Kircher Family Irrevocable Trust dated June 22, 2010 (11)
10.10	Stock Purchase Agreement with LDK Solar Co., Ltd. dated January 5, 2011 (12)
10.11	Form of Lock-up Agreements (12)
10.12	Voting Agreement (Steven C. Kircher) dated January 5, 2011 (12)
10.13	2006 Equity Incentive Plan (7)
10.14	Form of Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement (7)
10.15	Form of Restricted Stock Award Agreement (7)
10.16	Reserve Account Security Agreement with East West Bank dated January 8, 2011 (8)
10.17	Term Loan Agreement with East West Bank dated June 6, 2011 (15)
10.18	Standard Form Office Lease with Lum Yip Kee, limited, doing business as Twin Trees Land Company (16)
10.19	Master Solar Module Sales Agreement with KOC Solar Credit LS LLC, dated November 9, 2011 (18)
10.20	Business Loan Agreement by and Between Cathay Bank and Solar Power, Inc. as signed on December 26, 2011 (19)
10.21	Commercial Security Agreement by and Between Cathay bank and Solar Power, Inc. as signed on December 26, 2011 (19)
10.22	Promissory Note by and between Cathay Bank and Solar Power, Inc. as signed on December 26, 2011 (19)
10.23	Commercial Guaranty by and between Cathay Bank and LDK Solar Co., Ltd. as signed on December 26, 2011 (19)

29

Exhibit No.	Description
10.24	ImClone and White Rose Security Agreement among Solar Power, Inc. and China Development Bank Corporation dated December 30, 2011 (20)
10.25	Facility Agreement relating to EPC Financing for White Rose Solar Power Project between SPI Solar New Jersey, Inc. and China Development Bank Corporation dated December 30, 2011 (20)
10.26	Facility Agreement relating to EPC Financing for ImClone Solar Power Project between SPI Solar New Jersey, Inc. and China Development Bank Corporation dated December 30, 2011 (20)
10.27	Office Lease with Glenborough San Francisco (21)
10.28	Secured Promissory Note by Solar Hub Utilities, LLC dated April 27, 2012 (22)
10.29	Security Agreement between Solar Hub Utilities, LLC, as Debtor, and Solar Power, Inc., as Secured Party dated April 27, 2012 (22)
10.30	Amended and Restated Solar Development Acquisition and Sale Agreement by and between Solar Power, Inc. and Solar Hub Utilities, LLC effective June 7, 2012 (23)
10.31	Security Agreement (Membership Interest) by and among by JP Energy Partners LP, Estelle Green, Richard Kalau Jones, Jeremy Staat, and Luke Estes, each individually and collectively as Grantors and Patrick Shudak, as Manager, for the benefit of Solar Power, Inc. dated July 12, 2012 (23)
10.32	Security Agreement (Assets) by and between by Solar Hub Utilities, LLC, as Debtor, and Solar Power, Inc., as Secured Party (23)
10.33	Acquisition and Stock Purchase Agreement by and between Solar Power, Inc. and the Shareholders of Solar Green Technology dated as of June 25, 2012 (24)
10.34	First Amendment to Amended and Restated Solar Development Acquisition and Sale Agreement by and between Solar Power, Inc. and Solar Hub Utilities, LLC dated October 18, 2012 (25)
10.35	Change in Terms Agreement by and between Cathay Bank and Solar Power, Inc., dated December 28, 2012 (26)
10.36	Modification of Business Loan Agreement by and between Cathay Bank and Solar Power, Inc., dated December 28, 2012 (26)
10.37	Subordination Agreement by and between Cathay Bank, Solar Power, Inc. and LDK Solar Co., LTD, dated December 28, 2012 (26)
10.38	Solar Development Agreement dated March 12, 2013 (27)
10.39	Limited Liability Company Agreement for Calwaii Power Holdings, LLC (27)
10.40	Omnibus Amendment to Loan Documents dated March 12, 2013 (27)
10.41	Amended and Restated Promissory Note dated March 12, 2013 (27)
10.42	Intercreditor Agreement dated March 12, 2013 (27)
10.43	Office Building Lease with BEP Roseville Investors, LLC, doing business as Ellis Partners, LLC, executed April 25, 2013 (28)
10.44	Exchange and Release Agreement dated December 26, 2013 (29)
10.45	Form of Project Management Agreement (30)
10.46	Second Amended and Restated Operating Agreement for KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC dated February 18, 2014 (31)
14.1	Code of Ethics (13)
16.1	Letter of Perry-Smith LLP (14)
21.1	List of Subsidiaries
23.1	Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm — Crowe Horwath LLP
31.1	Certification of the Principal Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2	Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32	Certification of Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
101.INS*	XBRL Instance Document

30

Exhibit No.	Description
101.SCH*	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document
101.CAL*	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document
101.DEF*	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document
101.LAB*	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document
101.PRE*	XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Presentation Document

Footnotes to Exhibits Index

*	XBRL (Extensible Business Reporting Language) information is furnished and not filed or a part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, is deemed not filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and otherwise is not subject to liability under these sections.
(1)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 3, 2006.
(2)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 29, 2006.
(3)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 6, 2006.
(4)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 6, 2006.
(5)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 22, 2006.
(6)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 20, 2007.
(7)	Incorporated by reference to the Form SB-2 filed with the SEC on January 17, 2007.
(8)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 12, 2011.
(9)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on September 23, 2009.
(10)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 7, 2010.
(11)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on August 4, 2010.
(12)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 6, 2011.
(13)	Incorporated by reference to Form 10KSB filed with the SEC on April 16, 2007.
(14)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 30, 2011.
(15)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 6, 2011.
(16)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 7, 2011.
(17)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 23, 2011.
(18)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on November 15, 2011.
(19)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 30, 2011.
(20)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 5, 2012.
(21)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 13, 2012.
(22)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 3, 2012.
(23)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K/A filed with the SEC on July 18, 2012.
(24)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on June 29, 2012.
(25)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 24, 2012.
(26)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on January 3, 2013.
(27)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on March 15, 2013.
(28)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on May 1, 2013.
(29)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 21, 2014.
(30)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 21, 2014.
(31)	Incorporated by reference to Form 8-K filed with the SEC on February 21, 2014.

31

SIGNATURES

In accordance with Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

	SOLAR POWER, INC.
April 15, 2014	/s/ Min Xiahou
	By:  Min Xiahou
	Its:  Chief Executive Officer
	(Principal Executive Officer)
April 15, 2014	/s/ Charlotte Xi
	By:  Charlotte Xi
	Its:  Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
	Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

Pursuant to requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated:

Signature	Capacity	Date
/s/ Min Xiahou	Director	April 15, 2014
Min Xiahou
/s/ Xiaofeng Peng	Director	April 15, 2014
Xiaofeng Peng
/s/ Charlotte Xi	Director	April 15, 2014
Charlotte Xi

32

Index to Financial Statements

	Page
Item 8. — Financial Statements of Solar Power, Inc., a California corporation
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm — Crowe Horwath LLP		F-2
Consolidated Balance Sheets		F-3
Consolidated Statements of Operations		F-4
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Loss		F-5
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ (Deficit) Equity		F-6
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows		F-7
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements		F-8

F-1

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Stockholders
Solar Power, Inc.
Roseville, California

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Solar Power, Inc. (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive loss, stockholders’ (deficit) equity, and cash flows for the years then ended. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Solar Power, Inc. as of December 31, 2013 and 2012, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company has incurred a current year net loss of $32.2 million, has an accumulated deficit of $56.1 million, has experienced a significant reduction in working capital, has past due related party accounts payable and a debt facility under which a bank has declared amounts immediately due and payable. Additionally, the Company’s parent company LDK Solar Co., Ltd (“LDK”) has experienced significant financial difficultiesincluding the filing of a winding up petition on February 24, 2014. These matters raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management’s plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 2. The consolidated financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

/s/ Crowe Horwath LLP

San Francisco, California

April 15, 2014

F-2

SOLAR POWER, INC.
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
(In thousands, except for share data)

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,031		$	17,823
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $5,887 and $393, respectively		6,260			43,807
Accounts receivable, related party		3,905			11,858
Notes receivable		8,450			14,120
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts		-			31,423
Construction in progress		-			16,078
Inventories, net		23			1,618
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		4,458			4,267
Restricted cash		-			20
Total current assets		24,127			141,014
Intangible assets		1,132			1,703
Restricted cash, net of current portion		400			400
Accounts receivable, noncurrent		12,349			-
Notes receivable, noncurrent		13,668			-
Property, plant and equipment at cost, net		11,752			18,754
Investment in affiliate		7,536			-
Other assets		-			958
Total assets	$	70,964		$	162,829
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ (DEFICIT) EQUITY
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	$	3,919		$	15,709
Accounts payable, related party		50,907			51,804
Lines of credit		4,250			10,877
Accrued liabilities		741			6,536
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts		862			4,935
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts, related party		-			49
Loans payable and capital lease obligations		-			28,601
Total current liabilities		60,679			118,511
Financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion		11,730			18,760
Other liabilities		1,422			1,436
Total liabilities		73,831			138,707
Commitments and contingencies		-			-
Stockholders’ (deficit) equity:
Preferred stock, par $0.0001, 20,000,000 shares authorized; none issued and outstanding		-			-
Common stock, par $0.0001, 250,000,000 shares authorized; 198,214,456 shares issued and outstanding		20			20
Additional paid in capital		53,376			48,219
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(189	)		(287	)
Accumulated deficit		(56,074	)		(23,830	)
Total stockholders’ (deficit) equity		(2,867	)		24,122
Total liabilities and stockholders’ (deficit) equity	$	70,964		$	162,829

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-3

SOLAR POWER, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
(In thousands, except for share and per share data)

	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2013			2012
Net sales:
Net sales	$	42,629		$	64,417
Net sales, related party		-			35,539
Total net sales		42,629			99,956
Cost of goods sold:
Cost of goods sold		42,582			56,016
Cost of goods sold, related party		-			32,617
Provision for losses on contracts		2,816			2,729
Total cost of goods sold		45,398			91,362
Gross (loss) profit		(2,769	)		8,594
Operating expenses:
General and administrative		17,534			13,061
Sales, marketing and customer service		2,050			10,647
Impairment charges		7,500			6,038
Engineering, design and product management		1,761			2,636
Total operating expenses		28,845			32,382
Operating loss		(31,614	)		(23,788	)
Other (expense) income:
Interest expense		(4,321	)		(4,065	)
Interest income		1,655			2,527
Gain from deconsolidation		3,537
Other expense		(688	)		(182	)
Total other income (expense), net		183			(1,720	)
Loss before income taxes		(31,431	)		(25,508	)
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes		813			(80	)
Net loss	$	(32,244	)	$	(25,428	)
Net loss per common share:
Basic and Diluted	$	(0.16	)	$	(0.13	)
Weighted average number of common shares used in computing per share amounts:
Basic and Diluted		198,214,456			190,461,696

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-4

SOLAR POWER, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(In thousands)

	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2013			2012
Net loss	$	(32,244	)	$	(25,428	)
Other comprehensive loss:
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period		(74	)		(110	)
Less: reclassification of foreign currency translation loss to net loss		172			-
Net change in accumulated other comprehensive loss		98			(110	)
Comprehensive loss	$	(32,146	)	$	(25,538	)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-5

SOLAR POWER, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF STOCKHOLDERS’ (DEFICIT) EQUITY
(In thousands)

	Common Stock				Additional Paid-In			Retained Earnings (Accumulated			Accumulated Other Comprehensive
	Shares		Amount		Capital			Deficit)			Loss			Total
Balance December 31, 2011		184,414	$	18	$	47,929		$	1,598		$	(177	)	$	49,368
Net loss									(25,428	)					(25,428	)
Change in foreign currency translation adjustments												(110	)		(110	)
Issuance of restricted stock		400		-		106									106
Issuance of common stock to acquire Solar Green Technology (See Note 5)		13,401		2		(253	)								(251	)
Issuance of warrants for financing						88									88
Stock-based compensation expense						349									349
Balance December 31, 2012		198,215		20		48,219			(23,830	)		(287	)		24,122
Net loss									(32,244	)					(32,244	)
Change in foreign currency translation adjustments												98			98
Solar Green Technology debt forgiveness						4,582									4,582
Stock-based compensation expense						575									575
Balance December 31, 2013		198,215	$	20	$	53,376		$	(56,074	)	$	(189	)	$	(2,867	)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-6

SOLAR POWER, INC.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(In thousands)

	For the Years Ended December 31,
	2013			2012
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$	(32,244	)	$	(25,428	)
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash used in operating activities:
Depreciation		1,283			1,062
Amortization		571			714
Stock-based compensation expense		575			349
Gain on deconsolidation		(3,537	)		-
Bad debt expense		9,303			375
Provision for obsolete inventory		-			291
Provision for warranty		-			221
Gain on sales of fixed assets		(382	)		(12	)
Amortization of loan fees		307			174
Change in deferred taxes		(150	)		387
Impairment of project assets		2,816			2,729
Impairment charges		7,500			6,038
Operating income from solar system subject to financing obligation		(1,183	)		(1,000	)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects of subsidiary deconsolidation:
Accounts receivable		11,491			27,077
Accounts receivable, related party		3,823			12,877
Notes receivable		(27,931	)		-
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billing on uncompleted contracts		28,692			(21,195	)
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billing on uncompleted contracts, related party		-			360
Construction in process		15,993			(18,807	)
Inventories		1,025			6,067
Prepaid expenses and other assets		(899	)		(3,127	)
Accounts payable		(5,452	)		3,534
Accounts payable, related party		7,815			(10,649	)
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts		(4,066	)		3,980
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts, related party		(49	)		(2,943	)
Accrued liabilities and other liabilities		(4,089	)		2,529
Net cash from operating activities		11,212			(14,397	)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Proceeds from repayment of notes receivable		7,007			2,286
Issuance of notes receivable		(1,335	)		(10,544	)
Proceeds from disposal or sale of fixed assets		-			424
Proceeds from sale of asset held for sale		-			1,500
Acquisitions of property, plant and equipment		(3	)		(1,011	)
Net cash from investing activities		5,669			(7,345	)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from line of credit and loans payable		2,666			26,474
Proceeds from sale leaseback		-			6,533
Decrease in restricted cash		20			538
Cash distributions in connection with the transfer of entities under common control		-			(251	)
Principal payments on loans payable and capital lease obligations		(36,285	)		(18,854	)
Net cash from financing activities		(33,599	)		14,440
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash		(74	)		602
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents		(16,792	)		(6,700	)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year		17,823			24,523
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year	$	1,031		$	17,823
Supplemental cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest	$	4,280		$	2,000
Cash paid for income taxes	$	-		$	516
Non-cash activities:
Debt forgiveness from related party	$	4,582			-
Acquisition of an entity under common control financed with stock	$	-			6,031
Assignment of loan associated with asset held for sale	$	-			4,153
Conversion of notes receivable to investment in affiliate, net of impairment charge	$	7,536			-

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

F-7

SOLAR POWER, INC.

NOTES TO THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

1.            Description of Business and Basis of Presentation

Description of Business

Solar Power, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively the “Company”) consist of the combination of the legacy reporting entity Solar Power, Inc. and Solar Green Technology S.p.A. (“SGT”) and their respective subsidiaries. Refer to Note 5 and 6 for further details of the accounting impact of the SGT acquisition and deconsolidation.

The Company is a global solar energy facility (“SEF”) developer offering our own brand of high-quality, low-cost distributed generation and utility-scale SEF development services. Primarily, the Company partners with developers around the world who hold large portfolios of SEF projects for whom it serves as co-developer and engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) contractor. The Company builds three basic types of SEFs: rooftop systems, ground mounted systems, and parking shade structure systems. The Company’s proprietary SkyMount® commercial rooftop racking system and its custom parking shade structures are procured through contract manufacturers and built to the Company’s design specifications are still being used for current projects under development.

In addition to designing, engineering and constructing large-scale SEFs, the Company also provides long-term operations and maintenance (“O&M”) services through our proprietary O&M program SPIGuardianTM. This service program provides a comprehensive suite of services that engage upon a facility’s commissioning to provide performance monitoring, system reporting, preventative maintenance and full warranty support over the anticipated life of the SEF. While the Company still considers its O&M services to be within its core competencies, it has obtained third party outsourcing for these services to assist in the reduction of operating expenses.

On January 5, 2011, the Company entered into a stock purchase agreement with LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), a vertically integrated solar wafer, cell and solar module manufacturer. On March 31, 2011, LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. by making a significant investment in our business that provided working capital and broader relationships that allowed us to more aggressively pursue commercial and utility projects globally. LDK’s modules are used in the majority of the systems the Company produces; however, it maintains relationships with other module manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of modules.

Basis of Presentation

The Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) and require management to make certain judgments, estimates and assumptions. These may affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. They also may affect the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Key estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements include: contract percentage-of-completion and cost estimates, construction in progress, allowance for doubtful accounts, stock-based compensation, warranty reserve, deferred taxes, valuation of inventory, and valuation of other intangible assets. Actual results could differ from those estimates upon subsequent resolution of identified matters.

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business are dependent on, among other things, the Company’s ability to operate profitably, to generate cash flows from operations, and to pursue financing arrangements to support its working capital requirements.

F-8

NOTE 2 – GOING CONCERN CONSIDERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT’S PLAN

As shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, the Company incurred a net loss of $32.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 and has an accumulated deficit of $56.1 million as of December 31, 2013. Working capital levels have decreased significantly from $22.4 million at December 31, 2012 to negative $36.6 million at December 31, 2013. In February 2014, the Company’s parent company, LDK, who owns approximately 71% of the Company’s outstanding Common Stock announced that LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues. It is unknown at this time if LDK’s joint provisional liquidation will require or result in the Company disposing of assets in an orderly manner, in a liquidation scenario or at all. If the Company is required to dispose of assets to satisfy LDK’s creditors, it could result in the Company incurring losses.

We are experiencing the following risks and uncertainties in the business:

● As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company has accounts payable due to LDK of $50.9 million and $51.8 million, respectively. All of the accounts payable due to LDK are currently past due and payable to LDK. Although there are no formal agreements, LDK has verbally indicated that it will not demand payment until the receivable from the customer has been collected. In light of LDK's recent filing for liquidation, it is unclear whether or not LDK will be able to continue to allow the Company to defer repayment to LDK. Should LDK change its position and demand payment for the past due amount prior to collection of the related receivable from the customer, the Company does not have the ability to make the payment currently due without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. With LDK as a majority shareholder, the significant risks and uncertainties associated with their filing for liquidation by LDK could have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of Solar Power, Inc. as well as indicate an inability for LDK to support the Company's business.

● On March 25, 2014, Solar Power, Inc. (the “Company”) received notice from Cathay Bank stating that the Company is in default under the Business Loan Agreement dated December 26, 2011 and as amended on January 2, 2013 (the “Loan Agreement”) due to (i) the Company failing to make payments as due pursuant to the Loan Agreement and pursuant to the forbearance agreements entered into between the parties, and (ii) the guarantor, LDK, filing an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands on February 24, 2014. Based on these events of default, Cathay Bank has accelerated the entire principal balance due under the Loan Agreement. The Company owes approximately $4.25 million under the Loan Agreement, plus accrued interest and fees. The balance under the Loan Agreement will continue to incur interest at 11% per year. If the Company cannot remedy the default, the Company does not have the ability to make the payments without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. Since the loan balance is secured by the Company’s assets, Cathay Bank may foreclose on the collateral securing the loan which could significantly impact our business and our financial results.

● China Development Bank (“CDB”) has provided financing for construction and project financing on certain development projects in the past. They have also executed non-binding term sheets for other projects, but there is no assurance that the projects in process will be funded. CDB has been financing the Company’s projects primarily as a result of the fact that the Company’s majority shareholder is LDK and CDB has a long term relationship with LDK. Due to LDK’s financial difficulties, certain financing of the Company’s projects have been delayed. If CDB will no longer provide financing for the projects, the Company will need to seek construction financing from other sources which could be very difficult given the Company’s financial condition and LDK’s majority ownership of the Company. The company has completed projects in Greece with a customer that is requesting debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to six years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated. The company has also completed an additional commercial scale project in New Jersey with KDC Solar, which is currently seeking debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding notes receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to fifteen years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated.

F-9

● A key term of existing project financing with CDB is that the Company must use solar panels manufactured by LDK. Currently, however, LDK has demanded payment in advance in order to procure their solar panels. If the Company is unable to make advance payments required, the Company has and will continue to need to request its customers to make the required cash payments for the LDK solar panels to be utilized in projects under development. The Company continues to maintain relationships with other solar panel manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of solar panels.

The significant risks and uncertainties described above have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of the Company and raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management has made changes to the Company’s business model by managing cash flow through cost cutting measures, securing project financing before commencing further project development, and requesting that the Company’s customers make cash payments for solar panels for projects under development. If LDK or Cathay demands payment of amounts owed by the Company prior to collection of the related receivables, management plans to obtain additional debt or equity financing. There is no assurance that management’s plans to accelerate the collection of outstanding receivables or to obtain additional debt or equity financing will be successfully implemented, or implemented on terms favorable to the Company. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had $1.0 million in cash and cash equivalents. The Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities or any other adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

F-10

3.            Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Principles of Consolidation – The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of the Company and companies in which the Company has a controlling interest. Intercompany transactions have been eliminated. The equity method of accounting is used for investments in affiliates and other joint ventures over which the Company has significant influence but does not have effective control. Investments in affiliates in which the Company cannot exercise significant influence are accounted for on the cost method.

Management also evaluates whether an interest is a variable interest entity and whether the Company is the primary beneficiary. Consolidation is required if both of these criteria are met. The Company does not have any variable interest entities requiring consolidation.

If the entity is not considered a variable interest entity, it is treated as a voting interest entity, and the Company applies the guidance of ASC 810-20 – “Control of Partnerships and Similar Entities”, in determining whether the entity should be consolidated. The Company does not hold interests in any partnerships or similar entities requiring consolidation.

Equity Method – Investee companies that are not consolidated, but over which the Company exercises significant influence, are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Whether or not the Company exercises significant influence with respect to an Investee depends on an evaluation of several factors, including, among others, representation on the Investee company’s board of directors and ownership level. Under the equity method of accounting, an Investee company’s accounts are not reflected within the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and Statements of Operations; however, the Company’s share of the earnings or losses of the Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Equity loss—share of Investee company losses’’ in the Consolidated Statements of Operations since the activities of the investee are closely aligned with the operations of our business segment. The Company’s carrying value in an equity method Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Investment in affiliates’’ in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. We evaluate our equity method investments whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may be impaired. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. There were no earnings or losses recorded from our equity method investment.

Cash and cash equivalents — Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, cash accounts, interest bearing savings accounts and all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less, when purchased.

Inventories — Inventories are carried at the lower of cost or market, determined by the first in first out cost method. Work-in-progress and finished goods inventories consist of raw materials, direct labor and overhead associated with the manufacturing process. Provisions are made for obsolete or slow-moving inventories based on management estimates. Inventories are impaired based on the difference between the cost of inventories and the net realizable value based upon estimates about future demand from customers and specific customer requirements on certain projects. Inventory impairment charges establish a new cost basis for inventory and charges are not subsequently reversed to income even if circumstances later suggest that increased carrying amounts are recoverable. Inventory consisted of finished goods at December 31, 2013 and 2012.

F-11

Property, plant and equipment — Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost, including the cost of improvements. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation is recorded on the straight-line method based on the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:

Machinery (years)		5
Furniture, fixtures and equipment (years)		5
Computers and software (years)	3	—	5
Equipment acquired under capital leases (years)	3	—	5
Trucks (years)		3
Leasehold improvements	The shorter of the estimated life or the lease term
Solar energy facilities (years)		20

Impairment of long-lived assets — Long-lived assets, such as property, plant and equipment and intangible assets other than goodwill, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated undiscounted future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the carrying value of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset. Assets to be disposed of are separately presented in the balance sheet and reported at the lower of the carrying value or fair value less costs to sell, and are no longer depreciated.

Intangible assets other than goodwill — Intangible assets consist of patents and customer relationships. Amortization is recorded on the straight-line method based on the estimated useful lives of the assets.

Revenue recognition

Product sales — Revenue on product sales is recognized when there is evidence of an arrangement, title and risk of ownership have passed (generally upon delivery), the price to the buyer is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. The Company makes determination of our customer’s credit worthiness at the time it accepts their initial order. For cable, wire and mechanical assembly sales, there are no formal customer acceptance requirements or further obligations related to our assembly services once the Company ships its products. Customers do not have a general right of return on products shipped therefore the Company makes no provisions for returns.

Construction contracts — Revenue on photovoltaic system construction contracts is generally recognized using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, unless we cannot make reasonably dependable estimates of the costs to complete the contract or the contact value is not fixed, in which case we would use the completed contract method. At the end of each period, the Company measures the cost incurred on each project and compares the result against its estimated total costs at completion. The percent of cost incurred determines the amount of revenue to be recognized. Payment terms are generally defined by the contract and as a result may not match the timing of the costs incurred by the Company and the related recognition of revenue. Such differences are recorded as costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts (an asset account) or billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts (a liability account). For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, nil and $10.8 million of progress payments have been netted against contracts costs disclosed in the account costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts. The Company determines its customer’s credit worthiness at the time the order is accepted. Sudden and unexpected changes in customer’s financial condition could put recoverability at risk.

The percentage-of-completion method requires the use of various estimates, including, among others, the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. Contract revenues and contract costs to be recognized are dependent on the accuracy of estimates, including direct material and labor costs and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, tools, repairs, and depreciation costs. The Company has a history of making reasonable estimates of the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. However, due to uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, it is possible that actual contract revenues and completion costs may vary from estimates. Under the completed-contract method, contract costs are recorded to a construction in progress account and cash received are recorded to a liability account during the periods of construction. All revenues, costs, and profits are recognized in operations upon completion of the contract. A contract is considered complete and revenue recognized when all costs except insignificant items have been incurred and final acceptance has been received from the customer and receivables are deemed to be collectible. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts, if any, are recognized in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable.

F-12

For those projects where the Company is considered to be the owner, the project is accounted for under the rules of real estate accounting. In the event of a sale, the method of revenue recognition is determined by considering the extent of the buyer’s initial and continuing investment and the nature and the extent of the Company’s continuing involvement. Generally, revenue is recognized at the time of title transfer if the buyer’s investment is sufficient to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property and the Company does not have a substantial continuing involvement with the property. When continuing involvement is substantial and not temporary, the Company applies the financing method, whereby the asset remains on the balance sheet and the proceeds received are recorded as a financing obligation. When a sale is not recognized due to continuing involvement and the financing method is applied, the Company records revenue and expenses related to the underlying operations of the asset in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

For any arrangements containing multiple deliverables, the Company analyzes each activity within the sales arrangement to ensure that it adheres to the separation guidelines for multiple-element arrangements.  The Company allocates revenue for any transactions involving multiple elements to each unit of accounting based on its best estimate of the selling price, and recognize revenue for each unit of accounting when the revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Construction in Progress — During 2012, the Company entered into EPC arrangements to develop utility-scale SEF’s across Greece and Italy. The Company applied the completed contract method to these arrangements and capitalized all costs related to these projects at December 31, 2012. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company recorded a $2.7 million provision for losses on contracts to costs incurred on the Greek projects that exceeded the discounted present value of the contract, reducing the balance of construction in progress for the Greek projects to $14.7 million as of December 31, 2012. The Greek project was substantially complete at December 31, 2012; however, final acceptance had not yet been received. The project in Italy was still in progress at December 31, 2012 and had a construction in progress balance of $1.4 million. The Company sold the Italy project to a third party buyer in the first quarter of 2013 and revenue of $1.8 million was recognized. During the quarter ended September 30, 2013 the EPC project in Greece met the completion criteria and revenue of $13.9 million was recognized. Construction in progress was none and $16.1 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Accounts receivable — The Company grants open credit terms to credit-worthy customers. Terms vary per contract terms and range from 30 to 365 days. Contractually, the Company may charge interest for extended payment terms and require collateral.

Allowance for doubtful accounts — The Company regularly monitors and assesses the risk of not collecting amounts owed by customers. This evaluation is based upon a variety of factors, including an analysis of amounts current and past due along with relevant history and facts particular to the customer. It requires the Company to make significant estimates, and changes in facts and circumstances could result in material changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts. Changes in allowance for doubtful accounts are as follows (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Beginning balance	$	393		$	115
Provision for doubtful accounts		9,303			375
Write-offs		(3,809	)		(97	)
	$	5,887		$	393

Related Party Transactions — Products are bought from and sold to related parties at negotiated arms-length prices between the two parties.

Shipping and handling cost — Shipping and handling costs related to the delivery of finished goods are included in cost of goods sold. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, shipping and handling costs recorded in cost of goods sold were $0.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively.

F-13

Advertising costs — Costs for newspaper, television, radio, and other media and design are expensed as incurred. The Company expenses the production costs of advertising the first time the advertising takes place. The costs for this type of advertising were $0.1 million and $0.1 million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Stock-based compensation — The Company measures the stock-based compensation costs of share-based compensation arrangements based on the grant-date fair value and generally recognizes the costs in the financial statements over the employee requisite service period. For further details, see Note 13 — Stock-based compensation.

Product warranties — The Company offers the industry standard of 25 year product warranty for our solar modules and industry standard five years on inverter and balance of system components. Due to the warranty periods, the Company bears the risk of extensive warranty claims long after the Company has shipped product and recognized revenue. In our cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business, historically our warranty claims have not been material. In our solar photovoltaic business, our greatest warranty exposure is in the form of product replacement. Until the third quarter of 2007, the Company purchased its solar panels from third-party suppliers and since the third-party warranties are consistent with industry standards the Company considers its financial exposure to warranty claims immaterial. Certain photovoltaic construction contracts entered into during the year ended December 31, 2007 included provisions under which the Company agreed to provide warranties to the buyer, and during the quarter ended September 30, 2007 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company installed its own manufactured solar panels. As a result, the Company recorded the provision for estimated warranty exposure on these contracts within cost of sales. Since the Company does not have sufficient historical data to estimate its exposure, it looked to its own historical data in combination with historical data reported by other solar system installers and manufacturers. The Company now only installs panels manufactured by unrelated third parties and its parent, LDK. The Company provides LDK’s pass through warranty, and reserve for unreimbursed costs, such as labor, material and transportation costs to replace panels and balance of system components provided by third-party manufacturers. Because we have largely used solar panels purchased from LDK for past projects and will continue to purchase solar panels from LDK, we may be exposed to increased risk that LDK may not perform under its warranties due to LDK’s liquidation and in the event LDK becomes insolvent.

Income taxes — The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting and tax reporting bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon future taxable income. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion, or all of a deferred tax asset will not be realized based on the weight of available evidence, including expected future earnings.

The Company recognizes the benefit of uncertain tax positions in its financial statements when it concludes that a tax position is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination based solely on its technical merits. Only after a tax position passes the first step of recognition will measurement be required. Under the measurement step, the tax benefit is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is more likely than not to be realized upon effective settlement. This is determined on a cumulative probability basis.

The Company elects to accrue any interest or penalties related to its uncertain tax positions as part of its income tax expense.

Foreign Currency — The Consolidated Financial Statements are presented in our reporting currency, U.S. dollars. The functional currency for the subsidiaries in Italy is the Euro. The functional currency for the subsidiaries in The People’s Republic of China is the Renminbi. Accordingly, balance sheets of the foreign subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate in effect at the balance sheet date. Revenues and expenses are translated using the average exchange rates in effect during the period. Translation differences are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income as foreign currency translation. Gains or losses on transactions denominated in a currency other than the subsidiaries’ functional currency which arises as a result of changes in foreign exchange rates are recorded as foreign exchange gain or loss in the statements of operations.

Post-retirement and post-employment benefits — The Company’s subsidiaries which are located in the People’s Republic of China and Italy contribute to a state pension scheme on behalf of its employees. The Company recorded $0.1million and $0.6 million in expense related to its pension contributions for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Neither the Company nor its subsidiaries provide any other post-retirement or post-employment benefits.

F-14

4.            Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income—Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, which requires entities to provide information about the amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component. In addition, entities are required to present, either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or in the notes, significant amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by the respective line items of net income but only if the amount reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified to net income in its entirety in the same reporting period. For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income, entities are required to cross-reference to other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are described below:

The following table details the activity of the single component that comprises accumulated other comprehensive loss (in thousands).

Foreign currency translation	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period	$	(74	)	$	(110	)
Less: reclassification to net loss		172			-
Accumulated other comprehensive income	$	98		$	(110	)

In March 2013, FASB issued ASU No. 2013-05, Foreign Currency Matters—Parent’s Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity, which allows an entity to release cumulative translation adjustment into net income when a parent either sells a part or all of its investment in a foreign entity or no longer holds a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary or group of assets that is a nonprofit activity or a business within a foreign entity. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are included in Note 6.

In April 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-07, Liquidation Basis of Accounting, which require an entity to use the liquidation basis of accounting to present its financial statements when it determines that liquidation is imminent, unless the liquidation is the same as that under the plan specified in an entity’s governing documents created at its inception. Liquidation is imminent when the likelihood is remote that the entity will return from liquidation and either (a) a plan for liquidation is approved by the person or persons with the authority to make such a plan effective and the likelihood is remote that the execution of the plan will be blocked by other parties or (b) a plan for liquidation is being imposed by other forces (for example, involuntary bankruptcy). These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Entities should apply the requirements prospectively from the day that liquidation becomes imminent. Management is currently evaluating the impact of this amendment on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-11, Income Taxes—Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists, which provides that an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion thereof, should be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, except to the extent that a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available at the reporting date to settle any additional income taxes that would result from disallowance of a tax position, or the tax law does not require the entity to use, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, then the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented as a liability. These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Management does not expect the adoption of these changes to have a material impact on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

5.            Acquisition of Solar Green Technology

On June 27, 2012, Solar Power, Inc. entered into an Acquisition and Stock Purchase Agreement dated as of June 25, 2012 (the “SGT Agreement”) with the shareholders of SGT, an Italian-based limited liability company. Under the SGT Agreement, Solar Power, Inc. acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of SGT from SGT shareholders in exchange for 5.0 million Euros (approximately $6.3 million U.S. Dollars) payable in cash and common stock of the Company (the “Purchase Price”). The shareholders of SGT consisted of LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A (“LDK Europe”) and the two founders of SGT. LDK Europe, through its 70% ownership of the outstanding common stock of SGT, controlled SGT prior to the close of the transaction. LDK Europe is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK, which owned approximately 71% of the issued and outstanding common stock of the Company prior to and after the date of the acquisition of SGT. In July 2012, the Company issued 9,771,223 shares of its Common Stock to LDK Europe and 1,814,655 shares of its Common Stock to each of the two founders of SGT. In addition, the Company agreed to pay each of the two founders 100,000 Euros in cash, the payments of which were made in July 2012. The amount of shares of the Company’s Common Stock that were issued under the SGT Agreement were determined by calculating the amount of the Purchase Price payable to each shareholder divided by the daily volume-weighted average price of the Company’s Common Stock for each of the 90 trading days prior to June 11, 2012.

F-15

Because SGT and Solar Power, Inc. were under the common control of LDK as of the June 27, 2012 acquisition date, the acquisition is treated as a transaction between entities under common control. In accordance with ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations these financial statements reflect the combination of Solar Power, Inc. and SGT’s financial statements for all periods presented under which both entities were under the common control of LDK. The predecessor entity was determined to be SGT due to the fact that SGT was the first entity controlled by LDK. LDK obtained a controlling interest in SGT on July 10, 2009. LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011. As such, the Company recognized the assets and liabilities of SGT (the accounting receiving entity) at their historical carrying values in accordance with U.S. GAAP and recast the assets and liabilities of the legacy Solar Power, Inc. entity (the transferring entity) to reflect carrying value of the parent, LDK, which were stepped up to fair value on March 31, 2011 upon LDK obtaining a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. Refer to Note 11 —Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets for details of the balances carried by LDK now reflected in the Consolidated Financial Statements. Upon LDK acquiring its controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011, the equity of the new reporting entity for the combined financial statements of Solar Power, Inc. and SGT reflects the Preferred and Common Stock of Solar Power, Inc. and associated additional paid-in capital and SGT’s retained earnings and foreign currency translation at March 31, 2011. Adjustments to eliminate the capital share accounts of SGT were recorded to additional paid-in capital.

6.            Deconsolidation of Solar Green Technology

In November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. As a result of these actions, the Company deconsolidated SGT on December 30, 2013 when the Company ceased to have a controlling financial interest in SGT. The Company recognized a gain on deconsolidation of $3.5 million which was recognized in other income in the statement of operations as the liquidation is a run-off of operations. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital.

The Components of the gain on deconsolidation are as follows (in thousands):

Adjust SGT’s negative net assets to zero	$	6,127
Reclassify net liabilities forgiven by LDK to additional paid in capital		(1,980	)
Write-off of advance to SGT		(438	)
Reclassify cumulative foreign currency translation to the statement of operations		(172	)
Gain on deconsolidation	$	3,537

The fair value of the Company’s retained investment in SGT is zero at December 31, 2013. SGT will remain a related party of the Company.

F-16

7.            Balance Sheet Component

Accrued liabilities (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
Customer deposits	$	-	$	3,592
Capital lease obligation—current portion (1)		-		689
Product warranty liability—current portion (2)		200		200
Other		541		2,055
	$	741	$	6,536

(1) The noncurrent portion of the capital lease obligation is recorded in financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion.

(2) The noncurrent portion of the product warranty liability is recorded in other liabilities.

8.            Accounts and Notes Receivable

During 2013, the Company recognized $13.9 million revenue under the completed-contract method and recorded a receivable of $8.8 million (originally denominated in euro’s) related to the sale of its Greece projects. Due to the delay in the customer receiving term financing from CDB, the receivable is currently being collected over a six year agreed upon payment schedule, plus variable interest. The difference of $5.1 million between revenue recognized and account receivable balance relates to prior payments received from the customer which had been recorded as a customer deposit within accrued liabilities. As of December 31, 2013, due to the extended collection period, $2.2 million of the accounts receivable is recorded as current and $6.6 million is recorded in accounts receivable, noncurrent. During the second quarter of 2013, the Company reclassified $5.9 million of existing accounts receivables from a second unrelated customer to noncurrent based on the expected collection period which is anticipated to exceed one year. As of December 31, 2013, the Company has $2.0 million recorded in accounts receivable, current and $5.8 million recorded in accounts receivable, noncurrent from this second customer.

The Company agreed to advance to customer KDC predevelopment and site acquisition costs related to the Imclone EPC agreement between KDC and the Company and recorded the amount as notes receivable. The terms of the EPC agreement require repayment of the advance upon final completion of the SEF, which was expected to occur in the first half of 2013 but is now expected to occur in the first half of 2014 as the project did not break ground until the second quarter of 2013. The advance bears interest at the rate of 5% per year that is payable at the time the principal is repaid. The advance and related interest was collected in full in December 2013 as KDC obtained term debt financing for the project in December 2013. As of December 31, 2013and 2012, the balance of the note receivable from this project was none and $7.0 million, respectively. These amounts are recorded in the current notes receivable.

During 2013 the Company issued a note receivable to KDC for one completed contract with 15 year payment terms which began on the commercial operations date which was April 2013. The note bears interest of LIBOR plus 460bps. If the customer obtains term debt financing for their project, the collection of the note receivable may be accelerated.  During 2013 the Company issued another note receivable to KDC for the Mountain Creek project that has not been completed. In December 2013, the Company entered into an exchange and release agreement with KDC and agreed to exchange this note receivable due in exchange for a 64.50% limited ownership interest in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC (see Note 10). As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the balance recorded in noncurrent notes receivable related to this customer was $13.6 million and none, respectively.

On April 27, 2012, the Company made a secured loan of $1.0 million to Solar Hub Utilities, LLC (“Solar Hub”), to be used for pre-development costs, and recorded the amount in the account notes receivable. On June 8, 2012, the Company agreed to advance Solar Hub up to $9.0 million under a new $9.0 million secured promissory note, which refinanced the original $1.0 million advance and bears a 6% annual interest rate. In March 2013, the interest was changed to a 10% annual interest rate in accordance with the Amended and Restated Secured Promissory Note. This note receivable is secured by the project assets. Repayment in full of all borrowed amounts was due on December 31, 2012 but, in March 2013, was extended to a new maturity date of July 1, 2014 in accordance with the Amended and Restated Secured Promissory Note. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the balance of the note receivable from Solar Hub was $8.4 million and $7.1 million, respectively.

F-17

9.            Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment consisted of the following (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
PV solar systems	$	14,852		$	20,783
Plant and machinery		33			33
Furniture, fixtures and equipment		269			388
Computers and software		1,153			1,499
Trucks		-			44
Leasehold improvements		4			96
		16,311			22,843
Less: accumulated depreciation		(4,559	)		(4,089	)
	$	11,752		$	18,754

In 2009, Solar Power, Inc. capitalized a photovoltaic (“PV”) solar system relating to the Aerojet 1 solar development project along with the associated financing obligation, recorded under financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Due to certain guarantee arrangements as disclosed in Note 16— Commitments and Contingencies, the Company will continue to record this solar system in property, plant and equipment with its associated financing obligation in financing obligations as long as it maintains its continuing involvement with this project. The income and expenses relating to the underlying operation of the Aerojet 1 project are recorded in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company’s subsidiary, SGT, completed construction of two SEFs, which was classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2011. In May 2012, SGT sold to and leased back the assets from a leasing company. The gross amount of assets recorded under the capital leases was $5.9 million, with accumulated depreciation of $0.2 million, as of December 31, 2012. The SEFs were classified as PV solar systems under capital leases, which were recorded in Financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion, on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2012. The SEFs were removed from the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet in 2013 in connection with the Company’s deconsolidation of SGT.

Depreciation expense was $1.3 million and $1.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

10.          Investment in Affiliates

In April 2012, the Company entered into an EPC agreement with KDC to construct a 5.4 MW photovoltaic solar electricity project located in Mountain Creek, New Jersey (the “Mountain Creek Project”). In December 2013, the Company entered into an exchange and release agreement with KDC and agreed to exchange its $15.0 million note receivable due to the Company from KDC under the EPC agreement for construction of the Mountain Creek Project in exchange for a 64.50% limited ownership interest in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC (the “LLC”). The LLC holds all of the assets of the Mountain Creek Project. The construction of the Mountain Creek Project was approximately 25% complete at December 31, 2013. KDC is the managing member and holds a 35.5% managing member interest in the LLC. KDC has the power to control and manage the business and affairs of the LLC and is the only member that has the authority to bind the LLC. The Company holds protective rights with respect to approving (1) a sale or transfer of the Project; (2) the acquisition of real estate not related to the Project; (3) a merger of the LLC with another entity; (4) the alteration of the primary purpose of the LLC; and (5) the addition of new members. The Company does not have the substantive ability to dissolve (liquidate) the LLC or otherwise remove the managing member. As a result, the Company does not have a controlling financial interest in the LLC. The Company accounts for its investment in the LLC using the equity method of accounting. The Company determined the fair value of its investment in the LLC was $7.5 million based on an income approach applying discounted cash flows to measure the fair value using a 10% discount rate. The Company also used a market approach by comparing the fair value to other similar sized MW photovoltaic solar electricity projects taking into consideration the expected time and cost to complete the project. As a result, the Company recorded a $7.5 million impairment charge in the Consolidated Statement of Operations during the year ended December 31, 2013. There were no earnings or losses of the investee included in the Company’s consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.

F-18

Prior to the exchange and release agreement, the Company accumulated $2.7 million of costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on the uncompleted Mountain Creek project. As the costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings were not a part of the Company’s investment in the LLC, the Company recorded a $2.7 million provision for losses on contracts in the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013 and reducing the costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on the uncompleted contracts to $0 at December 31, 2013.

11.          Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

Goodwill

The carrying value of goodwill was $5.2 million at December 31, 2011, all of which was allocated to the Company’s single reportable segment. Of this balance, $4.7 million reflected the balance of Solar Power, Inc. carried by its parent company, LDK, as required under the accounting guidelines for a transfer of an entity under common control (refer to Note 5— Acquisition of Solar Green Technology). The Company evaluated the carrying value of its goodwill at December 31, 2011, and determined that no impairment of goodwill was identified. During the three months ended September 30, 2012, due primarily to the recent reduction in the Company’s market capitalization, the Company’s market value was significantly below its book value, thus triggering an impairment analysis. As a result of this analysis, the Company recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $5.2 million. As a result, the balance of goodwill as of December 31, 2012 was zero.

Other Intangible Assets

During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company determined that the carrying value of certain intangible assets related to customer relationships were no longer recoverable based on a discrete evaluation of the nature of the intangible assets, incorporating the effect of the Company’s recent decision to no longer maintain the customer relationships. As a result, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $0.1 million on its Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2012. The balance of intangible assets as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 was $1.1 million and $1.7 million, respectively.

Other intangible assets consisted of the following (in thousands):

	Useful Life (in months)		Gross		Impairment Charge			Accumulated Amortization			Net
As of December 31, 2013
Patent		57	$	2,700	$	-		$	(1,568	)	$	1,132
			$	2,700	$	-		$	(1,568	)	$	1,132
As of December 31, 2012
Patent		57	$	2,700	$	-		$	(997	)	$	1,703
Customer relationships		33		400		(148	)		(252	)		-
			$	3,100	$	(148	)	$	(1,249	)	$	1,703

F-19

As of December 31, 2013, the estimated future amortization expense related to other intangible assets is as follows (in thousands):

	Amount
Year
2014	$	570
2015		562
	$	1,132

12.          Stockholders’ (Deficit) Equity

Issuance of common stock

On June 8, 2012, the Company issued 400,000 shares of restricted Common Stock pursuant to the Company’s 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (defined below) as compensation to its non-employee directors. The fair value of the shares was $0.265 per share, the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on June 12, 2012, the date of the grant. The shares vested on the date of grant.

In July 2012, the Company issued 9,771,223 shares of its Common Stock to LDK Europe, a wholly-owned subsidiary of LDK, and 1,814,655 of its Common Stock to each of the two founders of SGT pursuant to the SGT Acquisition and Stock Purchase Agreement as part of an aggregate purchase price of 5.0 million Euros (approximately $6.3 million in U.S. Dollars at June 30, 2012). For further discussion of the transaction, refer to Note 5 —Acquisition of Solar Green Technology.

Issuance of warrants to purchase common stock

On February 15, 2012, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the issuance of a warrant agreement for Cathay General Bancorp to purchase 300,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock at $0.75 per share related to the credit facility entered into with Cathay Bank for an original aggregate principal amount of $9.0 million. The fair value of $0.29 per share was determined using the Black-Scholes-Merton model. Assumptions used in calculating fair value were as follows: a risk free interest rate of .38%, expected volatility of 103%, zero expected dividend yield, and an expected term of 3 years. The warrant expires on February 15, 2015 and is exercisable anytime within that period for an exercise price of $0.75 per share. The value of the warrant will be amortized over the remaining term of the associated credit facility through December 31, 2012. For the year ended December 31, 2012, $87,000 was amortized to interest expense.

The following table summarizes the Company’s warrant activity:

	Shares			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term
Outstanding as of January 1, 2012		2,066,302			2.91		0.91
Issued		300,000			0.75		3.00
Exercised		-			-		-
Cancelled/expired		(2,066,302	)		2.91		-
Outstanding December 31, 2012		300,000			0.75		2.10
Issued		-					-
Exercised		-					-
Cancelled/expired		-					-
Outstanding December 31, 2013		300,000			0.75		1.10
Exercisable December 31, 2013		300,000		$	0.75		1.10

F-20

In April 2013, LDK forgave $2.6 million of debt by SGT which is recorded in additional paid in capital. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital.

13.          Stock-based Compensation

The Company measures stock-based compensation expense for all stock-based compensation awards based on the grant-date fair value and recognizes the cost in the financial statements over the employee requisite service period.

The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation expense, by type of awards for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
Employee stock options	$	575	$	349
Restricted stock grants		-		106
Total stock-based compensation expense	$	575	$	455

The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation by line items for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
General and administrative	$	429	$	394
Sales, marketing and customer service		100		57
Engineering, design and product management		46		4
Total stock-based compensation expense		575		455
Tax effect on stock-based compensation expense		—		—
Total stock-based compensation expense after income taxes	$	575	$	455

As stock-based compensation expense recognized in the consolidated statements of operations is based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. Forfeitures are required to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.

Determining Fair Value

Valuation and Amortization Method — The Company estimates the fair value of service-based and performance-based stock options granted using the Black-Scholes option-pricing formula. The fair value is then amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service periods of the awards, which is generally the vesting period. In the case of performance-based stock options, amortization does not begin until it is determined that meeting the performance criteria is probable. Service-based and performance-based options typically have a five year life from date of grant and vesting periods of three to four years.

F-21

Expected Term — The Company’s expected term represents the period that the Company’s stock-based awards are expected to be outstanding. For awards granted subject only to service vesting requirements, the Company utilizes the simplified method for estimating the expected term of the stock-based award, instead of historical exercise data. For its performance-based awards, the Company has determined the expected term life to be five years based on contractual life and the seniority of the recipient.

Expected Volatility —The Company uses historical volatility of the price of its common shares to calculate the volatility for its granted options.

Expected Dividend — The Company has never paid dividends on its common shares and currently does not intend to do so, and accordingly, the dividend yield percentage is zero for all periods.

Risk-Free Interest Rate — The Company bases the risk-free interest rate used in the Black-Scholes valuation model upon the implied yield curve currently available on U.S. Treasury zero-coupon issues with a remaining term equal to the expected term used as the assumption in the model.

Assumptions used in the determination of the fair value of share-based payment awards using the Black-Scholes model for stock option grants during the years ended December 31 were as follows:

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Expected term		3.75			3.75
Risk-free interest rate	0.95%	-	1.2%	0.6%	-	0.89%
Expected volatility	106%	-	118%	101	-	103%
Expected dividend yield		0%			0%

Equity Incentive Plan

On November 15, 2006, subject to approval of the stockholders, the Company adopted the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) which permits the Company to grant stock options to directors, officers or employees of the Company or others to purchase shares of common stock of the Company through awards of incentive and nonqualified stock options (“Option”), stock (“Restricted Stock” or “Unrestricted Stock”) and stock appreciation rights (“SARs”). The Plan was approved by the stockholders on February 7, 2007.

The Company currently has time-based options outstanding. The time-based options generally vest 25% annually and expire three to five years from the date of grant. The restricted shares were fully vested as of December 31, 2013. Total number of shares reserved and available for grant and issuance pursuant to this Plan is equal to 9% of the number of outstanding shares of the Company. Not more than 2,000,000 shares of stock shall be granted in the form of incentive stock options. Shares issued under the Plan will be drawn from authorized and unissued shares or shares now held or subsequently acquired by the Company. Outstanding shares of the Company shall, for purposes of such calculation, include the number of shares of stock into which other securities or instruments issued by the Company are currently convertible (e.g., convertible preferred stock, convertible debentures, or warrants for common stock), but not outstanding options to acquire stock. At December 31, 2013 there were 10,370,106 shares available for grant under the plan (9% of the outstanding shares of 198,214,456 plus outstanding warrants of 300,000 less options outstanding and exercises since inception).

The exercise price of any Option will be determined by the Company when the Option is granted and may not be less than 100% of the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant, and the exercise price of any incentive stock option granted to a stockholder with a 10% or greater shareholding will not be less than 110% of the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant. The exercise price per share of a SAR will be determined by the Company at the time of grant, but will in no event be less than the fair market value of a share of Company’s stock on the date of grant.

F-22

The following table summarizes the Company’s stock option activities:

	Shares			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term		Aggregate Intrinsic Value ($000)
Outstanding as of January 1, 2012		5,171,500		$	0.56
Granted		2,620,000			0.33
Exercised		—			—
Forfeited		(1,955,000	)		0.57
Outstanding as of December 31, 2012		5,836,500		$	0.45
Granted		4,450,000			0.06
Exercised		—			—
Forfeited		(3,172,250	)		0.47
Outstanding as of December 31, 2013		7,114,250		$	0.20		3.91	$	-
Vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2013		1,435,500		$	0.46		2.26	$	-
Vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013		7,114,250		$	0.20		3.91	$	-

The following table presents the exercise price and remaining life information about options exercisable at December 31, 2013:

Range of exercise price			Shares Exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life		Weighted average exercise price		Aggregate Intrinsic (000s)
$1.24	-	$1.30		150,000		1.00	$	1.25	$	-
$0.70	-	$1.23		27,000		0.24		0.74		-
$0.23	-	$0.69		1,258,500		2.53		0.36		-
				1,435,500		2.26	$	0.46	$	-

Changes in the Company’s non-vested stock awards are summarized as follows:

	Time-based Options					Restricted Stock
	Shares			Weighted Average Exercise Price Per Share		Shares			Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Non-vested as of January 1, 2012		4,325,000		$	0.41		-		$	-
Granted		2,620,000			0.33		400,000			0.27
Vested		(1,187,875	)		0.51		(400,000	)		0.27
Forfeited		(1,530,125	)		0.47		-			-
Non-vested as of December 31, 2012		4,227,000		$	0.38		-			-
Granted		4,450,000			0.06		-			-
Vested		(802,750	)		0.41		-			-
Forfeited		(2,195,500	)		0.64		-			-
Non-vested as of December 31, 2013		5,678,750		$	0.13		-		$	-

As of December 31, 2013, there was $0.6 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested option awards, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average of 3.2 years.

F-23

The total intrinsic value of shares vested during the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $0.7 million and $0.5 million, respectively. There were no changes to the contractual life of any fully vested options during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. There were no options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2013 or 2012.

Following is a summary of our restricted stock awards as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and changes during the years then ended:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value
Restricted stock units at January 1, 2012		925,868	$	0.79
Granted		400,000		0.27
Forfeited		-		-
Restricted stock units at December 31, 2012		1,325,868		0.63
Granted		-		-
Forfeited		-		-
Restricted stock units at December 31, 2013		1,325,868	$	0.63

14.          Income Taxes

(Loss) income before provision for income taxes is attributable to the following geographic locations for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	2013			2012
United States	$	(20,887	)	$	(20,924	)
Foreign		(10,544	)		(4,584	)
	$	(31,431	)	$	(25,508	)

The provision(benefit) for income taxes consists of the following for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	2013			2012
Current:
Federal	$	-		$	(46	)
State		7			(21	)
Foreign		979			(395	)
Total current		986			(462	)
Deferred:
Federal		-			-
State		-			-
Foreign		(173	)		382
Total deferred		(173	)		382
Total provision(benefit) for income taxes	$	813		$	(80	)

F-24

The provision for income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2013 was primarily the result of the SGT liquidation and the related charge off of the asset created by the elimination of the intercompany gain created by the sale of an asset between the Company and SGT during 2012.

The reconciliation between the actual income tax expense and income tax computed by applying the statutory U.S. Federal income tax rate of 35% to pre-tax (loss) income before provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31 is as follows (in thousands):

	2013			2012
Provision for income taxes at U.S. Federal statutory rate	$	(11,001	)	$	(8,928	)
State taxes, net of federal benefit		4			(13	)
Foreign taxes at different rate		4,500			1,591
Non-deductible expenses		100			(68	)
Valuation allowance		7,078			4,843
Other		(114	)		631
Impairment		246			1,864
	$	813		$	(80	)

Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of loss carry forwards and temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities for federal, state and foreign income taxes are as follows at December 31 are presented below (in thousands):

	2013			2012
Deferred income tax assets:
Net operating loss carry forwards	$	25,458		$	17,602
Temporary differences due to accrued warranty costs		684			690
Temporary differences due to bonus and vacation accrual		33			94
Temporary differences due to construction in progress		-			1,316
Other temporary differences		595			142
Allowance for bad debts		2,474			54
Credits		16			16
		29,260			19,914
Valuation allowance		(29,260	)		(19,914	)
Total deferred income tax assets		-			-
Deferred income tax liabilities:
Other temporary differences		-			(173	)
Total deferred income tax liabilities		-			(173	)
Net deferred tax (liabilities) assets	$	-		$	(173	)

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had a net operating loss carry forward for federal income tax purposes of approximately $56.8 million, which will start to expire in the year 2027. The Company had a total state net operating loss carry forward of approximately $68.7 million, which will start to expire in the year 2017. The Company has a foreign net operating loss carry forward of $2.8 million, some of which begin to expire in 2017. The Company had a federal alternative minimum tax credit of $16,000, which does not expire.

Utilization of the federal and state net operating losses is subject to certain annual limitations due to the “change in ownership” provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and similar state provisions. However, the annual limitation is not anticipated to result in the expiration of net operating losses and credits before utilization.

The Company recognizes deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that those deferred tax assets will be realized. Management reviews deferred tax assets periodically for recoverability and makes estimates and judgments regarding the expected geographic sources of taxable income in assessing the need for a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to their estimated realizable value. Realization of the Company’s deferred tax assets is dependent upon future earnings, if any, the timing and amount of which are uncertain. Because of the Company’s lack of earnings history, the net deferred tax assets have been fully offset by a valuation allowance. The valuation allowance increased by $9.4 million and $7.1 million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

F-25

The Company has no unremitted foreign earnings from Hong Kong and immaterial foreign retained earnings from the PRC.

The Company currently files income tax returns in the U.S., as well as California, New Jersey, and certain other foreign jurisdictions. The Company is currently not the subject of any income tax examinations. The Company’s tax returns remain open for examination for years after December 31, 2008.

The Company had no unrecognized tax benefits for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

15.          Lines of Credit and Loans Payable 

Lines of Credit

On December 26, 2011, the Company entered into a Business Loan Agreement with Cathay Bank (“Cathay”) whereby Cathay agreed to extend the Company a line of credit of the lesser of $9.0 million or 70% of the aggregate amount in certain accounts receivable, which will mature December 31, 2012. LDK agreed to guaranty the full amount of the loan under a Commercial Guaranty by and between LDK and Cathay dated December 26, 2011. The interest rate under the loan is variable, 1.25% above the prime rate. In conjunction with the Business Loan Agreement, the Company and Cathay entered into a Commercial Security Agreement dated December 26, 2011 (“Cathay Security Agreement”), pursuant to which Cathay is granted a security interest in the collateral, which is certain accounts receivable. See Note 12 — Stockholders’ (Deficit) Equity regarding the warrants associated with the line of credit that were issued in February 2012.

Under the Business Loan Agreement, the Company is required to adhere to certain covenants, including a profitability requirement and financial statement ratio covenants. On June 15, 2012, the Company and Cathay executed a modification to the terms of the line of credit to adjust the required debt to worth ratio from three to one from two and one-half to one, and to subject all future advances to 70% of the receipts related to EPC agreements reviewed and approved by Cathay. Due to the accounting treatment related to the Aerojet 1 solar project development, the Company’s debt to worth covenant was in violation at December 31, 2011 and continues to be in violation until the related financial obligation is satisfied. The Company obtained a waiver from Cathay that excludes the financial impact of the Aerojet 1 transaction from the calculation of the debt to worth ratio through the term of the loan.

As of September 30, 2012, the Company was in violation of two other covenants. Due to the loss before income taxes for the three months ended September 30, 2012, the Company did not meet the minimum $1.0 million pre-tax profit covenant. As a result of the second quarter 2012 reclassification of the CDB loan from long-term to short-term, the Company did not meet the current ratio covenant. A notice of default was not issued by Cathay.

In December 2012, the Company amended the Business Loan Agreement with Cathay. Under the terms of the amended loan agreement, the facility amount was reduced to $7.0 million, with a variable interest rate of 2.0% above the prime rate and a 6% floor rate. The maturity date is extended to June 30, 2013 with monthly principal payments of $0.5 million due each month beginning December 30, 2012. The covenants were amended to include, among other items, the subordination of the net account payable due to LDK and elimination of minimum income and cash flow requirements.

In August, 2013, the Company entered into an agreement with Cathay whereby Cathay agreed, subject to certain conditions precedent, to forbear from foreclosing on the security interest securing the Loan Agreement until September 30, 2013. In connection with the forbearance, the Company agreed to pay Cathay the outstanding and unpaid balance of the loan on September 30, 2013. In addition, as of September 30, 2013, the interest rate under the loan equals 11%. All proceeds from the sale of projects and any payments received from KDC shall be applied to loan payment.

F-26

In November, 2013, the Company entered into another forbearance agreement with Cathay whereby Cathay agreed to forbear from foreclosing on the security interest securing the Loan Agreement until December 31, 2013. In connection with the forbearance, the Company agreed to pay Cathay the outstanding and unpaid balance of the loan on December 31, 2013. The forbearance agreement expired on December 31, 2013 without payment being made. In March 2014, the Company received a formal notice of default and demand under the loan documents and forbearance agreement from Cathay Bank which requires the Company to repay the aggregate outstanding principal balance of the loan and unpaid interest.

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had a balance outstanding to Cathay on the line of credit of $4.25 million and $4.4 million, respectively, recorded in the current account lines of credit.

During 2012, SGT entered into various unsecured revolving credit agreements with six Italian financial institutions under which SGT could borrow up to 4.0 million Euros (approximately $5.1 million U.S. Dollars). Amounts borrowed for advances on customer invoices or for performance bonds to customers may be repaid and reborrowed after repayment. SGT is required to pay interest on outstanding borrowings at interest rates ranging from 4.4% to 9.9%, compounded quarterly. Repayment is due for each invoice advance upon repayment by the customer, up to 120 days from utilization of each facility. As of December 31, 2012, $4.4 million was outstanding under the revolving credit facilities, classified in the current account lines of credit.

Loans Payable

On December 30, 2011, SPI New Jersey entered into two facility agreements with CDB. The first Facility Agreement is for a $3.6 million facility and a RMB 72,150,000 ($11.9 million at current exchange rates) facility and relates to EPC Financing for one of the Company’s customers. No borrowings were drawn under the RMB 72,150,000 facility with CDB. The facility expired on December 31, 2012. The second Facility Agreement is for a $15.6 million facility and a RMB 77,850,000 ($12.9 million at current exchange rates) facility and relates to EPC financing for another project of the same customer. SPI New Jersey has twelve months to draw upon the facilities. The interest rate is a variable interest rate based on either LIBOR plus a margin, in the case of a loan under a U.S. dollar portion, or the standard RMB interest rate for similar loans, in the case of a loan under a RMB portion. The interest is payable every six months. Under each Facility Agreement, SPI New Jersey is obligated to pay a front-end fee of 1.5% of the total amount of the U.S. dollars portion of a Facility Agreement upon the first drawing under the U.S. dollars portion of that Facility Agreement. Further, SPI New Jersey is obligated to pay a front-end fee of 1.5% of the total amount of the RMB portion of a Facility Agreement upon the first drawing under the RMB portion of that Facility Agreement. Additionally, SPI New Jersey is obligated to pay a fee equal to 0.5% per annum of the available but undrawn funds. The loans under a facility may be prepaid in whole or in part. However, any repaid portion cannot be re-borrowed. The full amount outstanding under a facility is required to be paid in full twenty-four months from the date the facility was first utilized, which was December 2011. The loans outstanding under the facility also become payable on the occurrence of certain events, including a change of control of SPI New Jersey. During the three months ended March 31, 2012, SPI New Jersey repaid the first Facility Agreement of $3.6 million upon completion of the related solar development project. No amounts remain outstanding under the first Facility Agreement as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. During the three months ended June 30, 2012, the Company drew down the remaining amount of RMB 77,850,000 (or $12.3 million in USD) under the second Facility Agreement. In December 2013, upon collection of its note receivable and related interest from customer KDC (see Note 8), the Company repaid the amounts outstanding and related interest under the loan payable in full. As of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the outstanding balance under the second facility agreement was none and $27.9 million, respectively, which was recorded in current loans payable and capital lease obligations.

On December 30, 2011, the Company and CDB entered into a Security Agreement (the “CDB Security Agreement”), whereby the Company granted CDB a security interest in certain collateral. The collateral relates to the Project Facilities financed and the electricity grid-connected photovoltaic, solar power generation facilities that are the subject of the EPC Contract with specified installed capacity. The carrying value of the assets were $22.6 million as of December 31, 2012. The CDB Security Agreement provided CDB with security for two term loan facilities that CBD, as lender, extended to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, SPI Solar New Jersey, Inc. (“SPI New Jersey”) as discussed above (collectively, the “Facility Agreements” and each a “Facility Agreement”). Under the CDB Security Agreement, CDB may, among other rights involving the collateral, sell the collateral or withdraw funds from certain accounts of the Company in the event of a default under a Facility Agreement. The CDB Security Agreement terminated upon satisfaction in full of the obligations under the Facility Agreements.

F-27

16.          Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments

Restricted cash —At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had restricted bank deposits of $0.4 million. The restricted bank deposits consist of a reserve pursuant to our guarantees of Solar Tax Partners 1, LLC (“STP”) with the bank providing the debt financing on the Aerojet 1 solar generating facility (see below for additional details related to the Aerojet 1 development project).

Guarantee —On December 22, 2009, in connection with an equity funding of STP related to the Aerojet 1 solar development project, the Company along with STP’s other investors entered into a Guaranty (“Guaranty”) to provide the equity investor, Greystone Renewable Energy Equity Fund (“Greystone”), with certain guarantees, in part, to secure investment funds necessary to facilitate STP’s payment to the Company under the EPC. Specific guarantees made by Solar Power, Inc. include the following in the event of the other investors’ failure to perform under the operating agreement:

• Operating Deficit Loans—the Company would be required to loan Master Tenant or STP monies necessary to fund operations to the extent costs could not be covered by Master Tenant’s or STP’s cash inflows. The loan would be subordinated to other liabilities of the entity and earn no interest; and

• Exercise of Put Options—At the option of Greystone, the Company may be required to fund the purchase by Managing Member of Greystone’s interest in Master Tenant under an option exercisable for 9 months following a 63 month period commencing with operations of the Facility. The purchase price would be equal to the greater of the fair value of Greystone’s equity interest in Master Tenant or $1.0 million.

The Company has recorded on its Consolidated Balance Sheet the guarantees of $0.1 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, which approximates their fair value (refer to Note 18— Fair Value of Financial Instruments). These amounts, less related amortization, are included in accrued liabilities. These guarantees for the Aerojet 1 project are accounted for separately from the financing obligation related to the Aerojet 1 project because they are with different counterparties.

Financing Obligation —The guarantees associated with Aerojet 1 constitute a continuing involvement in the project. While the Company maintains its continuing involvement, it will apply the financing method and, therefore, has recorded and classified the proceeds received of $11.7 million and $12.9 million from the project in long-term liabilities within financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion, at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Performance Guaranty — On December 18, 2009, the Company entered into a 10-year energy output guaranty related to the photovoltaic system installed for STP at the Aerojet 1 facility in Rancho Cordova, CA. The guaranty provided for compensation to STP’s system lessee for shortfalls in production related to the design and operation of the system, but excluding shortfalls outside the Company’s control such as government regulation. The Company believes that the probability of shortfalls is unlikely and if they should occur they would be covered under the provisions of its current panel and equipment warranty provisions. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, there continues to be no charges against our reserves related to this performance guaranty.

F-28

Product Warranties —Solar Power, Inc. offers the industry standard of 25 years for our solar modules and industry standard five years on inverter and balance of system components. Due to the warranty period, Solar Power, Inc. bears the risk of extensive warranty claims long after the Company has shipped product and recognized revenue. In our cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business, historically our warranty claims have not been material. In our solar photovoltaic business, our greatest warranty exposure is in the form of product replacement. Until the third quarter of 2007, Solar Power, Inc. purchased its solar panels from third-party suppliers and since the third-party warranties are consistent with industry standards it considered our financial exposure to warranty claims immaterial. Certain photovoltaic construction contracts entered into during the year ended December 31, 2007 included provisions under which Solar Power, Inc. agreed to provide warranties to the buyer, and during the quarter ended September 30, 2007 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2010, Solar Power, Inc. installed its own manufactured solar panels. As a result, the Company recorded the provision for the estimated warranty exposure on these contracts within cost of sales. Since Solar Power, Inc. does not have sufficient historical data to estimate its exposure, it has looked to its own historical data in combination with historical data reported by other solar system installers and manufacturers. The Company now only installs panels manufactured by unrelated third parties and its parent, LDK. The Company provides the manufacturer’s pass through warranty, and reserves for unreimbursed costs, such as labor, material and transportation costs to replace panels and balance of system components provided by third-party manufacturers. The current portion is presented in accrued liabilities and the non-current portion is presented in the noncurrent account other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The accrual for warranty claims consisted of the following (in thousands):

	2013		2012
Beginning balance - January 1	$	1,537	$	1,679
Provision charged to warranty expense		-		221
Less: warranty claims		-		(363	)
Ending balance - December 31,		1,537		1,537
Current portion of warranty liability		200		200
Non-current portion of warranty liability	$	1,337	$	1,337

Operating leases — The Company leases facilities under various operating leases, some of which contain escalation clauses, which expire through 2017. The Company also leases vehicles under operating leases. Rental expenses under operating leases included in the statement of operations were $0.5 million and $0.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Future minimum payments under all of our non-cancelable operating leases are as follows as of December 31, 2013 (in thousands):

2014	$	171
2015		176
2016		182
2017		17
Thereafter		-
	$	546

Contingencies

Motech Industries, Inc. (“Motech”) filed a complaint against the Company on November 21, 2011, in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, alleging that the Company breached a November 29, 2010 settlement agreement by failing to make payments set forth therein for products supplied to the Company by Motech. Motech has alleged causes of action for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing seeking to recover a total of $339,544.15 in damages from the Company plus its attorneys’ fees and costs. The Company filed its answer on December 22, 2011 generally denying all of the allegations in Motech’s complaint. Specifically, the Company contended that it had paid Motech in full for all monies owed under the settlement agreement. On January 25, 2013, the Court denied Motech’s motion for summary judgment. During the quarter ended June 30, 2013, the parties settled the dispute and the Company paid a settlement amount to Motech in the amount of $150,000 to resolve the matter in exchange for a mutual release of all claims.

F-29

On July 26, 2013, we filed a complaint against Seashore Solar, Inc. and Seashore Solar Development, LLC (collectively “Seashore”) and KDC Solar RTC, LLC (“KDC”) in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County, under Docket No. SOM-C-12042-13. This lawsuit relates to a solar power project in Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey (the “project”). We sold solar panels to Seashore for use in the Project. The unpaid portion of the purchase price for the panels is approximately $2,800,000. We also entered into an EPC agreement with Seashore with regard to the Project. Seashore sold the Project to KDC and is no longer in a position to satisfy its obligations under the EPC agreement. We are seeking damages from Seashore for the unpaid solar panels and breach of the EPC agreement. The parties are in the process of negotiating a settlement agreement. The accounts receivable from Seashore Solar, Inc. is fully reserved as of December 31, 2013.

In November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. SGT currently has insufficient funds to fund the SGT liquidation process. Under the plan of liquidation the Company is obligated to fund 600,000 Euros as of December 31, 2013 of which LDK is responsible for 100,000 Euros. In the event SGT does not receive additional funds needed to proceed with the liquidation, SGT will likely be forced to file for bankruptcy protection. The Company accrued a liability for 500,000 Euros for the unpaid portion of its obligation to fund SGT’s liquidation at December 31, 2013.

From time to time, the Company is involved in various other legal and regulatory proceedings arising in the normal course of business. While the Company cannot predict the occurrence or outcome of these proceedings with certainty, it does not believe that an adverse result in any pending legal or regulatory proceeding, individually or in the aggregate, would be material to our consolidated financial condition or cash flows; however, an unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for a specific interim period or year.

17.          Operating Risk and Geographical Information

Concentrations of Credit Risk and Major Customers — A substantial percentage of the Company’s net revenue comes from sales made to a small number of customers to whom sales are typically made on an open account basis. Details of customers accounting for 10% or more of total net revenue for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 are as follows (in thousands):

	2013					2012
Customer	Revenue		% of Total Revenue			Revenue		% of Total Revenue
Related party sales, including North Palm Springs Investments LLC*	$	-		-	%	$	35,539		36	%
Taneo Fund Management Company		13,854		32	%		-
KDC Solar Credit LS, LLC		22,829		54	%		26,010		26	%
	$	36,683		86	%	$	61,549		62	%

*             North Palm Springs Investments, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK Solar USA, Inc.

Details of the accounts receivable, net, notes receivable, and costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts and construction in progress from the customers with the largest balances at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively are (in thousands):

	2013					2012
Customer	$		% of Total			$		% of Total
Related party sales, including North Palm Springs Investments LLC*	$	-		-	%	$	11,858		11	%
KDC Solar Credit LS, LLC		13,668		31	%		39,993		39	%
SDL Solar		7,056		16	%		-		-	%
Solar Hub		8,450		19	%		-		-	%
Taneo Fund Management Company		8,801		20	%		16,078		16
	$	37,975		86	%	$	67,929		66	%

*             North Palm Springs Investments, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK Solar USA, Inc.

F-30

Geographical Information

Net sales by geographic location are as follows (in thousands):

Location (a)	2013		2012
United States	$	25,347	$	56,366
Greece		13,854		8,251
Italy		3,428		35,101
China		-		238
	$	42,629	$	99,956

(a) Sales are attributed to countries based on location of customer.

Geographic information, which is based upon physical location, for long-lived assets was as follows (in thousands):

Location	2013		2012
United States	$	11,750	$	12,845
Italy		-		5,905
China (including Hong Kong)		2		4
	$	11,752	$	18,754

18.           Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying values and fair values of the Company’s financial instruments were as follows (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013				December 31, 2012
	Carrying value		Fair value		Carrying value		Fair value
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,031	$	1,031	$	17,823	$	17,823
Notes receivable, current		8,450		8,450		14,120	$	14,120
Notes receivable, noncurrent		13,668		13,668		-	$	-
Line of credit and Loans Payable		4,250		4,250		39,478	$	39,478

The following methods were used to estimate the fair values of other financial instruments:

Cash and cash equivalents. The carrying amount approximates fair value because of the short maturity of the instruments. The fair value for Cash and cash equivalents were classified in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

Notes receivable, current, Notes receivable, noncurrent. The fair value of Notes receivable, current were based on anticipated cash flows, which approximates carrying value, and were classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. The fair value of Notes receivable, noncurrent were classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The Company used multiple techniques, including an income approach applying discounted cash flows approach, to measure the fair value using Level 3 inputs; the results of each technique have been reasonably weighted based upon management’s judgment applying qualitative considerations to determine the fair value at the measurement date.

Line of credit and Loans payable. The carrying amount approximated fair due to the short maturity and their variable market rates of interest that change with current Prime or LIBOR rate and no change in counterparty credit risk and were classified as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

F-31

19.          Related Party Transactions

In September 2012, SGT transferred its interest in its wholly owned subsidiary, Moiac Solare Srl (“Moiac”), to Terrasol Solar SA (“Terrasol”). Terrasol’s parent, Century Solar Jewel SA is 40% owned by LDK Solar Europe Holding SA, a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK. The total contract value from the EPC agreements for the construction of 641kW solar development projects owned by Moiac is $1.9 million.

In June 2012, SGT began construction on multiple solar development projects under EPC agreements with Terrasol. The total contract value from the construction of these solar development projects is $16.1 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded net sales to LDK, NPSLLC and Terrasol of none and $35.5 million, respectively, with a cost of goods sold of none and $32.6 million, respectively, primarily consisting of solar development costs. As of December 31, 2013, accounts receivable from LDK was $3.9 million primarily related to the receivables from solar development projects with and inventory sale to LDK in prior year. As of December 31, 2012, accounts receivable from LDK was $11.9 million primarily related to the receivables from solar development projects with and inventory sale to LDK.

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had accounts payable to LDK of $50.9 million and $51.8 million, respectively, primarily related to purchases of solar panels for solar development projects. See Note 2 — Going Concern Considerations and Management’s Plan for further discussion related to the accounts payables with LDK. The Company and LDK have agreed to the right of setoff for all intercompany receivables and payables.

In June 2013, LDK forgave $2.6 million in indebtedness to provide an injection of capital to SGT to keep their shareholder capital from going negative and triggering liquidity accounting under Italian statutory law. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital. Refer to Note 6 for further details of the SGT deconsolidation.

20.          Subsequent Events

In February 2014, LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues.

In March 2014, the Company received a formal notice of default and demand under the loan documents and forbearance agreement from Cathay Bank which requires the Company to repay the aggregate outstanding principal balance of the loan and unpaid interest.

* * *

EX-21

Exhibit 21.1

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

Greece Renewable Energy Ventures 1, LLC, a California Limited Liability corporation

IAS Electronics (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., a PRC WOFE

International Assembly Solutions, Limited, a Hong Kong corporation

Solar Green Technology S.p.A

Solar Tax Partners 2, LLC, a California Limited Liability corporation

SPI China (HK) Limited, a Hong Kong corporation

SPI China (PRC)

SPI Construction

SPI Manufacturing, Inc.

SPI Solar New Jersey, Inc. a New Jersey corporation

YES! Construction Services

YES!

  EX-23 3 ex23-1.htm EXHIBIT 23.1

Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-147246 on Form S-8 of Solar Power, Inc. of our report dated April 15, 2014 relating to the consolidated financial statements, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Solar Power, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2013.

/s/ Crowe Horwath LLP

San Francisco, California

April 15, 2014

EX-23

sopw20131231_10k.htm

EX-31

EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Min Xiahou, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Solar Power, Inc;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Dated: April 15, 2014	/s/ Min Xiahou
	By:  Min Xiahou
	Its:  Chief Executive Officer
	(Principal Executive Officer)

EX-31

EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Charlotte Xi, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K of Solar Power, Inc;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Dated: April 15, 2014	/s/ Charlotte Xi
	By:  Charlotte Xi
	Its:  Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
	Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

EX-32

EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the annual report of Solar Power, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Min Xiahou, Chief Executive Officer and Charlotte Xi, Interim Chief Financial Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: April 15, 2014	/s/ Min Xiahou
	By:  Min Xiahou
	Its:  Chief Executive Officer
	(Principal Executive Officer)
	/s/ Charlotte Xi
	By:  Charlotte Xi
	Its:  Interim Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial
	Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)

XML

Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Risks and Uncertainties [Abstract]

Schedules of Concentration of Risk, by Risk Factor [Table Text Block]

	2013					2012
Customer	Revenue		% of Total Revenue			Revenue		% of Total Revenue
Related party sales, including North Palm Springs Investments LLC*	$	-		-	%	$	35,539		36	%
Taneo Fund Management Company		13,854		32	%		-
KDC Solar Credit LS, LLC		22,829		54	%		26,010		26	%
	$	36,683		86	%	$	61,549		62	%

	2013					2012
Customer	$		% of Total			$		% of Total
Related party sales, including North Palm Springs Investments LLC*	$	-		-	%	$	11,858		11	%
KDC Solar Credit LS, LLC		13,668		31	%		39,993		39	%
SDL Solar		7,056		16	%		-		-	%
Solar Hub		8,450		19	%		-		-	%
Taneo Fund Management Company		8,801		20	%		16,078		16
	$	37,975		86	%	$	67,929		66	%

Schedule of Revenue from External Customers Attributed to Foreign Countries by Geographic Area [Table Text Block]

Location (a)	2013		2012
United States	$	25,347	$	56,366
Greece		13,854		8,251
Italy		3,428		35,101
China		-		238
	$	42,629	$	99,956

Schedule of Disclosure on Geographic Areas, Long-Lived Assets in Individual Foreign Countries by Country [Table Text Block]

Location	2013		2012
United States	$	11,750	$	12,845
Italy		-		5,905
China (including Hong Kong)		2		4
	$	11,752	$	18,754

XML

Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Details) (USD $)	4 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
	Sep. 30, 2012	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2011
Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Details) [Line Items]
Goodwill		$ 0		$ 5,200,000
Goodwill, Impairment Loss	5,200,000
Impairment of Intangible Assets, Finite-lived		148,000
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets, Net		1,703,000	1,132,000
Solar Power Inc. [Member]
Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Details) [Line Items]
Goodwill				$ 4,700,000

XML

Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Details) - Components of Gain on Deconsolidation (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	1 Months Ended		12 Months Ended
	Jun. 30, 2013	Apr. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2013
Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Details) - Components of Gain on Deconsolidation [Line Items]
Reclassify net liabilities forgiven by LDK to additional paid in capital	$ (2,000)	$ (2,000)	$ (2,000)
Gain on deconsolidation			3,537
Solar Green Technology [Member]
Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Details) - Components of Gain on Deconsolidation [Line Items]
Adjust SGT’s negative net assets to zero			6,127
Reclassify net liabilities forgiven by LDK to additional paid in capital			(1,980)
Write-off of advance to SGT			(438)
Reclassify cumulative foreign currency translation to the statement of operations			(172)
Gain on deconsolidation			$ 3,537

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Details) - The Reconciliation Between the Actual Income Tax Expense and Income Tax (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
The Reconciliation Between the Actual Income Tax Expense and Income Tax [Abstract]
Provision for income taxes at U.S. Federal statutory rate	$ (11,001)	$ (8,928)
State taxes, net of federal benefit	4	(13)
Foreign taxes at different rate	4,500	1,591
Non-deductible expenses	100	(68)
Valuation allowance	7,078	4,843
Other	(114)	631
Impairment	246	1,864
	$ 813	$ (80)

XML

Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Details) - Other Intangible Assets (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets [Line Items]
Intangible Assets, Gross	$ 2,700	$ 3,100
Intangible Assets, Impairment Charge		(148)
Intangible Assets, Accumulated Amortization	(1,568)	(1,249)
Intangible Assets, Net	1,132	1,703
Patents [Member]
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets [Line Items]
Intangible Assets Estimated Useful Life (in months)	57 months	57 months
Intangible Assets, Gross	2,700	2,700
Intangible Assets, Accumulated Amortization	(1,568)	(997)
Intangible Assets, Net	1,132	1,703
Customer Relationships [Member]
Finite-Lived Intangible Assets [Line Items]
Intangible Assets Estimated Useful Life (in months)		33 months
Intangible Assets, Gross		400
Intangible Assets, Impairment Charge		(148)
Intangible Assets, Accumulated Amortization		$ (252)

XML

Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Long-lived Assets by Geographic Location (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Long-lived Assets by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Long-lived Assets	$ 11,752	$ 18,754
UNITED STATES
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Long-lived Assets by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Long-lived Assets	11,750	12,845
ITALY
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Long-lived Assets by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Long-lived Assets		5,905
CHINA
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Long-lived Assets by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Long-lived Assets	$ 2	$ 4

XML

Note 5 - Acquisition of Solar Green Technology (Details)	12 Months Ended	1 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Jun. 27, 2012 Solar Green Technology [Member] LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A [Member]	Jul. 31, 2012 LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A [Member]	Jun. 27, 2012 LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member]	Jul. 31, 2012 Two Founders of SGT [Member] EUR (€)	Jun. 27, 2012 Solar Green Technology [Member] USD ($)	Jun. 27, 2012 Solar Green Technology [Member] EUR (€)
Note 5 - Acquisition of Solar Green Technology (Details) [Line Items]
Business Acquisition, Percentage of Voting Interests Acquired						100.00%	100.00%
Business Acquisition, Cash Payable						$ 6,300,000	€ 5,000,000
Percentage of Common Stock Outstanding Owned by Parent Company	71.00%	70.00%		71.00%
Business Acquisition, Equity Interest Issued or Issuable, Number of Shares (in Shares)			9,771,223		1,814,655
Payments to Acquire Businesses, Gross (in Euro)					€ 100,000

XML

Note 9 - Property, Plant and Equipment (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]

Property, Plant and Equipment [Table Text Block]

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
PV solar systems	$	14,852		$	20,783
Plant and machinery		33			33
Furniture, fixtures and equipment		269			388
Computers and software		1,153			1,499
Trucks		-			44
Leasehold improvements		4			96
		16,311			22,843
Less: accumulated depreciation		(4,559	)		(4,089	)
	$	11,752		$	18,754

XML

Note 18 - Fair Value of Financial Instruments (Details) - Financial Instruments (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Financial Instruments [Abstract]
Cash and cash equivalents	$ 1,031	$ 17,823	$ 24,523
Cash and cash equivalents	1,031	17,823
Notes receivable, current	8,450	14,120
Notes receivable, current	8,450	14,120
Notes receivable, noncurrent	13,668
Notes receivable, noncurrent	13,668
Line of credit and Loans Payable	4,250	39,478
Line of credit and Loans Payable	$ 4,250	$ 39,478

XML

Note 16 - Commitments and Contingencies (Details)	3 Months Ended	12 Months Ended					12 Months Ended						1 Months Ended	5 Months Ended
	Jun. 30, 2013 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2013 Liquidation Plan [Member] Solar Power Inc. [Member] EUR (€)	Dec. 30, 2013 Liquidation Plan [Member] LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member] EUR (€)	Dec. 31, 2013 Liquidation Plan [Member] EUR (€)	Dec. 31, 2013 PV Solar Systems [Member] Solar Tax Partners LLC [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Solar Modules [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Inverter and Balance of System Components [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Guarantee Obligations [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Guarantee Obligations [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Greystone [Member] USD ($)	Nov. 21, 2011 Motech Industries Inc [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Seashore Solar Development [Member] USD ($)
Note 16 - Commitments and Contingencies (Details) [Line Items]
Restricted Cash and Cash Equivalents, Noncurrent		$ 400,000	$ 400,000
Redeemable Noncontrolling Interest, Equity, Carrying Amount												1,000,000
Guarantees, Fair Value Disclosure		100,000	100,000
Long-term Debt										11,700,000	12,900,000
Product Liability Accrual, Period Expense							0
Warranty Term								25 years	5 years
Operating Leases, Rent Expense		500,000	900,000
Loss Contingency, Damages Sought, Value													339,544.15	2,800,000
Litigation Settlement, Amount	150,000
Contractual Obligation (in Euro)				600,000	100,000
Accrued Liabilities (in Euro)						€ 500,000

XML

Note 12 - Stockholders' Equity (Details)	1 Months Ended		12 Months Ended			12 Months Ended	0 Months Ended	12 Months Ended	0 Months Ended		1 Months Ended					1 Months Ended
	Jun. 30, 2013 USD ($)	Apr. 30, 2013 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 USD ($)	Feb. 15, 2012 Common Stock [Member] Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Common Stock [Member]	Feb. 15, 2012 Warrant [Member] Cathay Bank [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 Warrant [Member] Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Jun. 08, 2012 Director [Member] 2006 Equity Incentive Plan [Member]	Jun. 12, 2012 Director [Member] 2006 Equity Incentive Plan [Member] USD ($)	Jul. 31, 2012 LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A [Member]	Jul. 31, 2012 Two Founders of SGT [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Feb. 15, 2012 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Jul. 31, 2012 Solar Green Technology [Member] USD ($)	Jul. 31, 2012 Solar Green Technology [Member] EUR (€)
Note 12 - Stockholders' Equity (Details) [Line Items]
Stock Issued During Period, Shares, Restricted Stock Award, Gross (in Shares)						400			400,000
Share Price (in Dollars per share)										$ 0.265
Business Acquisition, Equity Interest Issued or Issuable, Number of Shares (in Shares)											9,771,223	1,814,655
Business Combination, Consideration Transferred																$ 6,300,000	€ 5,000,000
Class of Warrant or Right, Number of Securities Called by Warrants or Rights (in Shares)					300,000
Class of Warrant or Right, Exercise Price of Warrants or Rights (in Dollars per Item)					0.75										0.75
Line of Credit Facility, Amount Outstanding													4,250,000	4,400,000	9,000,000
Class of Warrant or Right, Fair-valued Price Per Share (in Dollars per share)					$ 0.29
Fair Value Assumptions, Risk Free Interest Rate							38.00%
Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Volatility Rate							103.00%
Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Dividend Rate							0.00%
Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Term							3 years
Allocated Share-based Compensation Expense			575,000	455,000				87,000
Gains (Losses) on Extinguishment of Debt	2,600,000	2,600,000	4,582,000
Deconsolidation. Net Liabilities	$ 2,000,000	$ 2,000,000	$ 2,000,000

XML

Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Concentrations of Credit Risk and Major Customers (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue	$ 42,629		$ 99,956
Related Party Sales, Including North Palm Springs Investments LLC [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Sales Revenue, Net [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue		[1]	35,539	[1]
Revenue, Percentage		[1]	36.00%	[1]
Recievables, Percentage		[1]	36.00%	[1]
Related Party Sales, Including North Palm Springs Investments LLC [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Accounts Receivable [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue, Percentage		[1]	11.00%	[1]
Recievables		[1]	11,858	[1]
Recievables, Percentage		[1]	11.00%	[1]
Taneo Fund Management Company [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Sales Revenue, Net [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue	13,854
Revenue, Percentage	32.00%
Recievables, Percentage	32.00%
Taneo Fund Management Company [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Accounts Receivable [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue, Percentage	20.00%		16.00%
Recievables	8,801		16,078
Recievables, Percentage	20.00%		16.00%
KDC Solar Credi tLS LLC [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Sales Revenue, Net [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue	22,829		26,010
Revenue, Percentage	54.00%		26.00%
Recievables, Percentage	54.00%		26.00%
KDC Solar Credi tLS LLC [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Accounts Receivable [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue, Percentage	31.00%		39.00%
Recievables	13,668		39,993
Recievables, Percentage	31.00%		39.00%
SDL Solar [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Accounts Receivable [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue, Percentage	16.00%
Recievables	7,056
Recievables, Percentage	16.00%
Solar Hub Utilities, LLC [Member] | Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Accounts Receivable [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue, Percentage	19.00%
Recievables	8,450
Recievables, Percentage	19.00%
Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Sales Revenue, Net [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue	36,683		61,549
Revenue, Percentage	86.00%		62.00%
Recievables, Percentage	86.00%		62.00%
Customer Concentration Risk [Member] | Accounts Receivable [Member]
Concentration Risk [Line Items]
Revenue, Percentage	86.00%		66.00%
Recievables	$ 37,975		$ 67,929
Recievables, Percentage	86.00%		66.00%

[1] North Palm Springs Investments, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK Solar USA, Inc.

XML

Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Net Sales by Geographic Location (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Net Sales by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Net Sales	$ 42,629	[1]	$ 99,956	[1]
UNITED STATES
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Net Sales by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Net Sales	25,347	[1]	56,366	[1]
GREECE
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Net Sales by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Net Sales	13,854	[1]	8,251	[1]
ITALY
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Net Sales by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Net Sales	3,428	[1]	35,101	[1]
CHINA
Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information (Details) - Net Sales by Geographic Location [Line Items]
Net Sales		[1]	$ 238	[1]

[1] Sales are attributed to countries based on location of customer.

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Details) - Deferred Income Taxes (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Deferred income tax assets:
Net operating loss carry forwards	$ 25,458	$ 17,602
Temporary differences due to accrued warranty costs	684	690
Temporary differences due to bonus and vacation accrual	33	94
Temporary differences due to construction in progress		1,316
Other temporary differences	595	142
Allowance for bad debts	2,474	54
Credits	16	16
	29,260	19,914
Valuation allowance	(29,260)	(19,914)
Deferred income tax liabilities:
Other temporary differences		(173)
Total deferred income tax liabilities		(173)
Net deferred tax (liabilities) assets		$ (173)

XML

Note 18 - Fair Value of Financial Instruments

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Fair Value Disclosures [Abstract]

Fair Value Disclosures [Text Block]

18.           Fair Value of Financial Instruments

The carrying values and fair values of the Company’s financial instruments were as follows (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013				December 31, 2012
	Carrying value		Fair value		Carrying value		Fair value
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,031	$	1,031	$	17,823	$	17,823
Notes receivable, current		8,450		8,450		14,120	$	14,120
Notes receivable, noncurrent		13,668		13,668		-	$	-
Line of credit and Loans Payable		4,250		4,250		39,478	$	39,478

The following methods were used to estimate the fair values of other financial instruments:

Cash and cash equivalents. The carrying amount approximates fair value because of the short maturity of the instruments. The fair value for Cash and cash equivalents were classified in Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

Notes receivable, current, Notes receivable, noncurrent. The fair value of Notes receivable, current were based on anticipated cash flows, which approximates carrying value, and were classified in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. The fair value of Notes receivable, noncurrent were classified in Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. The Company used multiple techniques, including an income approach applying discounted cash flows approach, to measure the fair value using Level 3 inputs; the results of each technique have been reasonably weighted based upon management’s judgment applying qualitative considerations to determine the fair value at the measurement date.

Line of credit and Loans payable. The carrying amount approximated fair due to the short maturity and their variable market rates of interest that change with current Prime or LIBOR rate and no change in counterparty credit risk and were classified as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

XML

Note 8 - Accounts and Notes Receivable (Details) (USD $)	12 Months Ended					3 Months Ended	4 Months Ended	12 Months Ended		12 Months Ended	3 Months Ended			12 Months Ended								1 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012		Dec. 31, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member]	Mar. 31, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member] Completed Contract Method [Member]	Sep. 30, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member] Completed Contract Method [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member] Completed Contract Method [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Second Unrealated Customer [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Second Unrealated Customer [Member] Expected Collection Period [Member]	Jun. 30, 2013 Second Unrealated Customer [Member] Expected Collection Period [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 EPC Contract [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 EPC Contract [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Exchange and Release Agreement [Member] KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member] London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Exchange and Release Agreement [Member] KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 Exchange and Release Agreement [Member] KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Solar Hub Utilities, LLC [Member]	Mar. 31, 2013 Solar Hub Utilities, LLC [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 Solar Hub Utilities, LLC [Member]	Apr. 27, 2012 Solar Hub Utilities, LLC [Member]	Jun. 08, 2012 Solar Hub Utilities, LLC [Member] Maximum [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Mountain Creek Project [Member] Exchange and Release Agreement [Member] KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member]
Note 8 - Accounts and Notes Receivable (Details) [Line Items]
Revenues	$ 42,629,000	[1]	$ 99,956,000	[1]		$ 1,800,000	$ 13,900,000	$ 13,900,000
Increase (Decrease) in Accounts Receivable	(11,491,000)		(27,077,000)		8,800,000
Accounts Receivable Extended Collection Period					6 years
Accrued Liabilities, Current	741,000		6,536,000		5,100,000
Accounts Receivable, Net, Current	6,260,000		43,807,000		2,200,000				2,000,000
Accounts Receivable, Net, Noncurrent	12,349,000				6,600,000				5,800,000
Reclassifcation of Account Receivable from Current to Noncurrent											5,900,000
Accounts Receivable, Collection Term										1 year					15 years
Note Receivable, Interest Rate												5.00%						10.00%		6.00%
Financing Receivable, Net	8,450,000		14,120,000									0	7,000,000		15,000,000		8,400,000		7,100,000
Debt Instrument, Basis Spread on Variable Rate														4.60%
Percent Ownership of Counterparty in Exchange for Note Receivable Due																						64.50%
Notes, Loans and Financing Receivable, Net, Noncurrent	13,668,000														13,600,000	0
Financing Receivable, Gross																				$ 1,000,000	$ 9,000,000

[1] Sales are attributed to countries based on location of customer.

XML

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Details) (USD $)	12 Months Ended						3 Months Ended		3 Months Ended	4 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012		Dec. 31, 2013 Solar Modules [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Inverter and Balance of System Components [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 Greek Projects [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 Italy Project [Member]	Mar. 31, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member] Completed Contract Method [Member]	Sep. 30, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member] Completed Contract Method [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Sale of Greece Project [Member] Completed Contract Method [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Minimum [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Maximum [Member]
Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Details) [Line Items]
Proceeds from Customers for Progress Payments			$ 10,800,000
Loss on Contracts							2,700,000
Construction in Progress, Gross			16,078,000				14,700,000	1,400,000
Revenues	42,629,000	[1]	99,956,000	[1]					1,800,000	13,900,000	13,900,000
Contract Terms												30 days	365 days
Shipping, Handling and Transportation Costs	100,000		600,000
Advertising Expense	100,000		100,000
Warranty Term					25 years	5 years
Pension Expense	$ 100,000		$ 600,000

[1] Sales are attributed to countries based on location of customer.

XML

Note 16 - Commitments and Contingencies (Details) - Future Minimum Payments Under Operating Leases (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013
Future Minimum Payments Under Operating Leases [Abstract]
2014	$ 171
2015	176
2016	182
2017	17
	$ 546

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Tables) [Line Items]

Schedule of Components of Income Tax Expense (Benefit) [Table Text Block]

	2013			2012
Current:
Federal	$	-		$	(46	)
State		7			(21	)
Foreign		979			(395	)
Total current		986			(462	)
Deferred:
Federal		-			-
State		-			-
Foreign		(173	)		382
Total deferred		(173	)		382
Total provision(benefit) for income taxes	$	813		$	(80	)

Schedule of Effective Income Tax Rate Reconciliation [Table Text Block]

	2013			2012
Provision for income taxes at U.S. Federal statutory rate	$	(11,001	)	$	(8,928	)
State taxes, net of federal benefit		4			(13	)
Foreign taxes at different rate		4,500			1,591
Non-deductible expenses		100			(68	)
Valuation allowance		7,078			4,843
Other		(114	)		631
Impairment		246			1,864
	$	813		$	(80	)

Schedule of Deferred Tax Assets and Liabilities [Table Text Block]

	2013			2012
Deferred income tax assets:
Net operating loss carry forwards	$	25,458		$	17,602
Temporary differences due to accrued warranty costs		684			690
Temporary differences due to bonus and vacation accrual		33			94
Temporary differences due to construction in progress		-			1,316
Other temporary differences		595			142
Allowance for bad debts		2,474			54
Credits		16			16
		29,260			19,914
Valuation allowance		(29,260	)		(19,914	)
Total deferred income tax assets		-			-
Deferred income tax liabilities:
Other temporary differences		-			(173	)
Total deferred income tax liabilities		-			(173	)
Net deferred tax (liabilities) assets	$	-		$	(173	)

Geographic Regions [Member]

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Tables) [Line Items]

Schedule of Components of Income Tax Expense (Benefit) [Table Text Block]

	2013			2012
United States	$	(20,887	)	$	(20,924	)
Foreign		(10,544	)		(4,584	)
	$	(31,431	)	$	(25,508	)

XML

Note 9 - Property, Plant and Equipment (Details) - Property, Plant and Equipment (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross	$ 16,311	$ 22,843
Less: accumulated depreciation	(4,559)	(4,089)
	11,752	18,754
PV Solar Systems [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross	14,852	20,783
Plant and Machinery [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross	33	33
Furniture and Fixtures [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross	269	388
Computer Equipment [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross	1,153	1,499
Trucks [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross		44
Leasehold Improvements [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Property plant and equipment, gross	$ 4	$ 96

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Details) (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Income Tax Disclosure [Abstract]
Effective Income Tax Rate Reconciliation, at Federal Statutory Income Tax Rate, Percent	35.00%	35.00%
Deferred Tax Assets, Operating Loss Carryforwards, Domestic	$ 56,800,000
Deferred Tax Assets, Operating Loss Carryforwards, State and Local	68,700,000
Deferred Tax Assets, Operating Loss Carryforwards, Foreign	2,800,000
Deferred Tax Assets, Tax Credit Carryforwards, Alternative Minimum Tax	16,000
Valuation Allowance, Deferred Tax Asset, Change in Amount	9,400,000	7,100,000
Unrecognized Tax Benefits	$ 0	$ 0

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Consolidated Stock-Based Compensation by Line Items (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Allocation of Recognized Period Costs [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	$ 575,000	$ 455,000
Total stock-based compensation expense after income taxes	575,000	455,000
General and Administrative Expense [Member]
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Allocation of Recognized Period Costs [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	429,000	394,000
Selling and Marketing Expense [Member]
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Allocation of Recognized Period Costs [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	100,000	57,000
Engineering Design and Product Development [Member]
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Allocation of Recognized Period Costs [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	$ 46,000	$ 4,000

XML

Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Details) (USD $)	1 Months Ended		12 Months Ended
	Jun. 30, 2013	Apr. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2013
Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Details) [Line Items]
Deconsolidation, Gain (Loss), Amount			$ 3,537,000
Deconsolidation. Net Liabilities	2,000,000	2,000,000	2,000,000
Solar Green Technology [Member]
Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Details) [Line Items]
Deconsolidation, Gain (Loss), Amount			3,537,000
Deconsolidation. Net Liabilities			1,980,000
Equity Method Investments, Fair Value Disclosure			$ 0

XML

Note 2 - Going Concern Considerations and Management's Plan

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Policy Text Block [Abstract]

Liquidity Disclosure [Policy Text Block]

NOTE 2 – GOING CONCERN CONSIDERATIONS AND MANAGEMENT’S PLAN

As shown in the accompanying consolidated financial statements, the Company incurred a net loss of $32.2 million during the year ended December 31, 2013 and has an accumulated deficit of $56.1 million as of December 31, 2013. Working capital levels have decreased significantly from $22.4 million at December 31, 2012 to negative $36.6 million at December 31, 2013. In February 2014, the Company’s parent company, LDK, who owns approximately 71% of the Company’s outstanding Common Stock announced that LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues. It is unknown at this time if LDK’s joint provisional liquidation will require or result in the Company disposing of assets in an orderly manner, in a liquidation scenario or at all. If the Company is required to dispose of assets to satisfy LDK’s creditors, it could result in the Company incurring losses.

We are experiencing the following risks and uncertainties in the business:

● As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company has accounts payable due to LDK of $50.9 million and $51.8 million, respectively. All of the accounts payable due to LDK are currently past due and payable to LDK. Although there are no formal agreements, LDK has verbally indicated that it will not demand payment until the receivable from the customer has been collected. In light of LDK's recent filing for liquidation, it is unclear whether or not LDK will be able to continue to allow the Company to defer repayment to LDK. Should LDK change its position and demand payment for the past due amount prior to collection of the related receivable from the customer, the Company does not have the ability to make the payment currently due without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. With LDK as a majority shareholder, the significant risks and uncertainties associated with their filing for liquidation by LDK could have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of Solar Power, Inc. as well as indicate an inability for LDK to support the Company's business.

● On March 25, 2014, Solar Power, Inc. (the “Company”) received notice from Cathay Bank stating that the Company is in default under the Business Loan Agreement dated December 26, 2011 and as amended on January 2, 2013 (the “Loan Agreement”) due to (i) the Company failing to make payments as due pursuant to the Loan Agreement and pursuant to the forbearance agreements entered into between the parties, and (ii) the guarantor, LDK, filing an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands on February 24, 2014. Based on these events of default, Cathay Bank has accelerated the entire principal balance due under the Loan Agreement. The Company owes approximately $4.25 million under the Loan Agreement, plus accrued interest and fees. The balance under the Loan Agreement will continue to incur interest at 11% per year. If the Company cannot remedy the default, the Company does not have the ability to make the payments without additional sources of financing or accelerating the collection of outstanding receivables. Since the loan balance is secured by the Company’s assets, Cathay Bank may foreclose on the collateral securing the loan which could significantly impact our business and our financial results.

● China Development Bank (“CDB”) has provided financing for construction and project financing on certain development projects in the past. They have also executed non-binding term sheets for other projects, but there is no assurance that the projects in process will be funded. CDB has been financing the Company’s projects primarily as a result of the fact that the Company’s majority shareholder is LDK and CDB has a long term relationship with LDK. Due to LDK’s financial difficulties, certain financing of the Company’s projects have been delayed. If CDB will no longer provide financing for the projects, the Company will need to seek construction financing from other sources which could be very difficult given the Company’s financial condition and LDK’s majority ownership of the Company. The company has completed projects in Greece with a customer that is requesting debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to six years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated. The company has also completed an additional commercial scale project in New Jersey with KDC Solar, which is currently seeking debt term financing from CDB. Because CDB has not yet provided the term financing, the Company will collect its outstanding notes receivables from the operation’s cash proceeds over an extended period of time of up to fifteen years and has reflected the receivables as noncurrent on the balance sheet. However, the customer continues to have discussions with CDB about financing, and if financing is obtained, collection of our receivables may be accelerated.

● A key term of existing project financing with CDB is that the Company must use solar panels manufactured by LDK. Currently, however, LDK has demanded payment in advance in order to procure their solar panels. If the Company is unable to make advance payments required, the Company has and will continue to need to request its customers to make the required cash payments for the LDK solar panels to be utilized in projects under development. The Company continues to maintain relationships with other solar panel manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of solar panels.

The significant risks and uncertainties described above have a significant negative impact on the financial viability of the Company and raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. Management has made changes to the Company’s business model by managing cash flow through cost cutting measures, securing project financing before commencing further project development, and requesting that the Company’s customers make cash payments for solar panels for projects under development. If LDK or Cathay demands payment of amounts owed by the Company prior to collection of the related receivables, management plans to obtain additional debt or equity financing. There is no assurance that management’s plans to accelerate the collection of outstanding receivables or to obtain additional debt or equity financing will be successfully implemented, or implemented on terms favorable to the Company. As of December 31, 2013, the Company had $1.0 million in cash and cash equivalents. The Consolidated Financial Statements do not include any adjustments related to the recoverability and classification of recorded assets or the amounts and classification of liabilities or any other adjustments that might result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Assumptions Used in the Determination of Fair Value of Share-Based Payment Awards	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Assumptions Used in the Determination of Fair Value of Share-Based Payment Awards [Line Items]
Expected term	3 years 9 months	3 years 9 months
Expected dividend yield	0.00%	0.00%
Minimum [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Assumptions Used in the Determination of Fair Value of Share-Based Payment Awards [Line Items]
Risk-free interest rate	0.95%	0.60%
Expected volatility	106.00%	101.00%
Maximum [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Assumptions Used in the Determination of Fair Value of Share-Based Payment Awards [Line Items]
Risk-free interest rate	1.20%	0.89%
Expected volatility	118.00%	103.00%

XML

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Details) - Property, Plant and Equipment Useful Lives	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Plant and Machinery [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	5
Furniture and Fixtures [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	5
Computer Equipment [Member] | Minimum [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	3
Computer Equipment [Member] | Maximum [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	5
Assets Held under Capital Leases [Member] | Minimum [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	3
Assets Held under Capital Leases [Member] | Maximum [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	5
Trucks [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	3
Leasehold Improvements [Member] | Minimum [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	The shorter of the estimated life or the lease term
Solar Energy Facilities [Member]
Property, Plant and Equipment [Line Items]
Propert, plant and equipment useful life	20

XML

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Tables) [Line Items]

Property, Plant and Equipment [Table Text Block]

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
PV solar systems	$	14,852		$	20,783
Plant and machinery		33			33
Furniture, fixtures and equipment		269			388
Computers and software		1,153			1,499
Trucks		-			44
Leasehold improvements		4			96
		16,311			22,843
Less: accumulated depreciation		(4,559	)		(4,089	)
	$	11,752		$	18,754

Allowance for Credit Losses on Financing Receivables [Table Text Block]

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Beginning balance	$	393		$	115
Provision for doubtful accounts		9,303			375
Write-offs		(3,809	)		(97	)
	$	5,887		$	393

Estimated Useful Lives [Member]

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Tables) [Line Items]

Property, Plant and Equipment [Table Text Block]

Machinery (years)		5
Furniture, fixtures and equipment (years)		5
Computers and software (years)	3	—	5
Equipment acquired under capital leases (years)	3	—	5
Trucks (years)		3
Leasehold improvements	The shorter of the estimated life or the lease term
Solar energy facilities (years)		20

XML

Accounting Policies, by Policy (Policies)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Consolidation, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Principles of Consolidation – The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of the Company and companies in which the Company has a controlling interest. Intercompany transactions have been eliminated. The equity method of accounting is used for investments in affiliates and other joint ventures over which the Company has significant influence but does not have effective control. Investments in affiliates in which the Company cannot exercise significant influence are accounted for on the cost method.

Management also evaluates whether an interest is a variable interest entity and whether the Company is the primary beneficiary. Consolidation is required if both of these criteria are met. The Company does not have any variable interest entities requiring consolidation.

If the entity is not considered a variable interest entity, it is treated as a voting interest entity, and the Company applies the guidance of ASC 810-20 – “Control of Partnerships and Similar Entities”, in determining whether the entity should be consolidated. The Company does not hold interests in any partnerships or similar entities requiring consolidation.

Equity Method Investments, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Equity Method – Investee companies that are not consolidated, but over which the Company exercises significant influence, are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Whether or not the Company exercises significant influence with respect to an Investee depends on an evaluation of several factors, including, among others, representation on the Investee company’s board of directors and ownership level. Under the equity method of accounting, an Investee company’s accounts are not reflected within the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and Statements of Operations; however, the Company’s share of the earnings or losses of the Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Equity loss—share of Investee company losses’’ in the Consolidated Statements of Operations since the activities of the investee are closely aligned with the operations of our business segment. The Company’s carrying value in an equity method Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Investment in affiliates’’ in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. We evaluate our equity method investments whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may be impaired. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. There were no earnings or losses recorded from our equity method investment.

Cash and Cash Equivalents, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Cash and cash equivalents — Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, cash accounts, interest bearing savings accounts and all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less, when purchased.

Inventory, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Inventories — Inventories are carried at the lower of cost or market, determined by the first in first out cost method. Work-in-progress and finished goods inventories consist of raw materials, direct labor and overhead associated with the manufacturing process. Provisions are made for obsolete or slow-moving inventories based on management estimates. Inventories are impaired based on the difference between the cost of inventories and the net realizable value based upon estimates about future demand from customers and specific customer requirements on certain projects. Inventory impairment charges establish a new cost basis for inventory and charges are not subsequently reversed to income even if circumstances later suggest that increased carrying amounts are recoverable. Inventory consisted of finished goods at December 31, 2013 and 2012.

Property, Plant and Equipment, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Property, plant and equipment — Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost, including the cost of improvements. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation is recorded on the straight-line method based on the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:

Machinery (years)		5
Furniture, fixtures and equipment (years)		5
Computers and software (years)	3	—	5
Equipment acquired under capital leases (years)	3	—	5
Trucks (years)		3
Leasehold improvements	The shorter of the estimated life or the lease term
Solar energy facilities (years)		20

Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Impairment of long-lived assets — Long-lived assets, such as property, plant and equipment and intangible assets other than goodwill, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated undiscounted future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the carrying value of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset. Assets to be disposed of are separately presented in the balance sheet and reported at the lower of the carrying value or fair value less costs to sell, and are no longer depreciated.

Intangible Assets, Finite-Lived, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Intangible assets other than goodwill — Intangible assets consist of patents and customer relationships. Amortization is recorded on the straight-line method based on the estimated useful lives of the assets.

Revenue Recognition, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Revenue recognition

Product sales — Revenue on product sales is recognized when there is evidence of an arrangement, title and risk of ownership have passed (generally upon delivery), the price to the buyer is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. The Company makes determination of our customer’s credit worthiness at the time it accepts their initial order. For cable, wire and mechanical assembly sales, there are no formal customer acceptance requirements or further obligations related to our assembly services once the Company ships its products. Customers do not have a general right of return on products shipped therefore the Company makes no provisions for returns.

Construction contracts — Revenue on photovoltaic system construction contracts is generally recognized using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, unless we cannot make reasonably dependable estimates of the costs to complete the contract or the contact value is not fixed, in which case we would use the completed contract method. At the end of each period, the Company measures the cost incurred on each project and compares the result against its estimated total costs at completion. The percent of cost incurred determines the amount of revenue to be recognized. Payment terms are generally defined by the contract and as a result may not match the timing of the costs incurred by the Company and the related recognition of revenue. Such differences are recorded as costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts (an asset account) or billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts (a liability account). For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, nil and $10.8 million of progress payments have been netted against contracts costs disclosed in the account costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts. The Company determines its customer’s credit worthiness at the time the order is accepted. Sudden and unexpected changes in customer’s financial condition could put recoverability at risk.

The percentage-of-completion method requires the use of various estimates, including, among others, the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. Contract revenues and contract costs to be recognized are dependent on the accuracy of estimates, including direct material and labor costs and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, tools, repairs, and depreciation costs. The Company has a history of making reasonable estimates of the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. However, due to uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, it is possible that actual contract revenues and completion costs may vary from estimates. Under the completed-contract method, contract costs are recorded to a construction in progress account and cash received are recorded to a liability account during the periods of construction. All revenues, costs, and profits are recognized in operations upon completion of the contract. A contract is considered complete and revenue recognized when all costs except insignificant items have been incurred and final acceptance has been received from the customer and receivables are deemed to be collectible. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts, if any, are recognized in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable.

For those projects where the Company is considered to be the owner, the project is accounted for under the rules of real estate accounting. In the event of a sale, the method of revenue recognition is determined by considering the extent of the buyer’s initial and continuing investment and the nature and the extent of the Company’s continuing involvement. Generally, revenue is recognized at the time of title transfer if the buyer’s investment is sufficient to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property and the Company does not have a substantial continuing involvement with the property. When continuing involvement is substantial and not temporary, the Company applies the financing method, whereby the asset remains on the balance sheet and the proceeds received are recorded as a financing obligation. When a sale is not recognized due to continuing involvement and the financing method is applied, the Company records revenue and expenses related to the underlying operations of the asset in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

For any arrangements containing multiple deliverables, the Company analyzes each activity within the sales arrangement to ensure that it adheres to the separation guidelines for multiple-element arrangements.  The Company allocates revenue for any transactions involving multiple elements to each unit of accounting based on its best estimate of the selling price, and recognize revenue for each unit of accounting when the revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Construction in Progress — During 2012, the Company entered into EPC arrangements to develop utility-scale SEF’s across Greece and Italy. The Company applied the completed contract method to these arrangements and capitalized all costs related to these projects at December 31, 2012. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company recorded a $2.7 million provision for losses on contracts to costs incurred on the Greek projects that exceeded the discounted present value of the contract, reducing the balance of construction in progress for the Greek projects to $14.7 million as of December 31, 2012. The Greek project was substantially complete at December 31, 2012; however, final acceptance had not yet been received. The project in Italy was still in progress at December 31, 2012 and had a construction in progress balance of $1.4 million. The Company sold the Italy project to a third party buyer in the first quarter of 2013 and revenue of $1.8 million was recognized. During the quarter ended September 30, 2013 the EPC project in Greece met the completion criteria and revenue of $13.9 million was recognized. Construction in progress was none and $16.1 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Trade and Other Accounts Receivable, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Accounts receivable — The Company grants open credit terms to credit-worthy customers. Terms vary per contract terms and range from 30 to 365 days. Contractually, the Company may charge interest for extended payment terms and require collateral.

Receivables, Trade and Other Accounts Receivable, Allowance for Doubtful Accounts, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Allowance for doubtful accounts — The Company regularly monitors and assesses the risk of not collecting amounts owed by customers. This evaluation is based upon a variety of factors, including an analysis of amounts current and past due along with relevant history and facts particular to the customer. It requires the Company to make significant estimates, and changes in facts and circumstances could result in material changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts. Changes in allowance for doubtful accounts are as follows (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Beginning balance	$	393		$	115
Provision for doubtful accounts		9,303			375
Write-offs		(3,809	)		(97	)
	$	5,887		$	393

Related Party Transactions [Policy Text Block]

Related Party Transactions - Products are bought from and sold to related parties at negotiated arms-length prices between the two parties.

Shipping and Handling Cost, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Shipping and handling cost — Shipping and handling costs related to the delivery of finished goods are included in cost of goods sold. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, shipping and handling costs recorded in cost of goods sold were $0.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively.

Advertising Costs, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Advertising costs — Costs for newspaper, television, radio, and other media and design are expensed as incurred. The Company expenses the production costs of advertising the first time the advertising takes place. The costs for this type of advertising were $0.1 million and $0.1 million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Share-based Compensation, Option and Incentive Plans Policy [Policy Text Block]

Stock-based compensation — The Company measures the stock-based compensation costs of share-based compensation arrangements based on the grant-date fair value and generally recognizes the costs in the financial statements over the employee requisite service period. For further details, see Note 13 — Stock-based compensation.

Standard Product Warranty, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Product warranties — The Company offers the industry standard of 25 year product warranty for our solar modules and industry standard five years on inverter and balance of system components. Due to the warranty periods, the Company bears the risk of extensive warranty claims long after the Company has shipped product and recognized revenue. In our cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business, historically our warranty claims have not been material. In our solar photovoltaic business, our greatest warranty exposure is in the form of product replacement. Until the third quarter of 2007, the Company purchased its solar panels from third-party suppliers and since the third-party warranties are consistent with industry standards the Company considers its financial exposure to warranty claims immaterial. Certain photovoltaic construction contracts entered into during the year ended December 31, 2007 included provisions under which the Company agreed to provide warranties to the buyer, and during the quarter ended September 30, 2007 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company installed its own manufactured solar panels. As a result, the Company recorded the provision for estimated warranty exposure on these contracts within cost of sales. Since the Company does not have sufficient historical data to estimate its exposure, it looked to its own historical data in combination with historical data reported by other solar system installers and manufacturers. The Company now only installs panels manufactured by unrelated third parties and its parent, LDK. The Company provides LDK’s pass through warranty, and reserve for unreimbursed costs, such as labor, material and transportation costs to replace panels and balance of system components provided by third-party manufacturers. Because we have largely used solar panels purchased from LDK for past projects and will continue to purchase solar panels from LDK, we may be exposed to increased risk that LDK may not perform under its warranties due to LDK’s liquidation and in the event LDK becomes insolvent.

Income Tax, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Income taxes — The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting and tax reporting bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon future taxable income. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion, or all of a deferred tax asset will not be realized based on the weight of available evidence, including expected future earnings.

The Company recognizes the benefit of uncertain tax positions in its financial statements when it concludes that a tax position is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination based solely on its technical merits. Only after a tax position passes the first step of recognition will measurement be required. Under the measurement step, the tax benefit is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is more likely than not to be realized upon effective settlement. This is determined on a cumulative probability basis.

The Company elects to accrue any interest or penalties related to its uncertain tax positions as part of its income tax expense.

Foreign Currency Transactions and Translations Policy [Policy Text Block]

Foreign Currency — The Consolidated Financial Statements are presented in our reporting currency, U.S. dollars. The functional currency for the subsidiaries in Italy is the Euro. The functional currency for the subsidiaries in The People’s Republic of China is the Renminbi. Accordingly, balance sheets of the foreign subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate in effect at the balance sheet date. Revenues and expenses are translated using the average exchange rates in effect during the period. Translation differences are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income as foreign currency translation. Gains or losses on transactions denominated in a currency other than the subsidiaries’ functional currency which arises as a result of changes in foreign exchange rates are recorded as foreign exchange gain or loss in the statements of operations.

Pension and Other Postretirement Plans, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Post-retirement and post-employment benefits — The Company’s subsidiaries which are located in the People’s Republic of China and Italy contribute to a state pension scheme on behalf of its employees. The Company recorded $0.1million and $0.6 million in expense related to its pension contributions for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Neither the Company nor its subsidiaries provide any other post-retirement or post-employment benefits.

New Accounting Pronouncements, Policy [Policy Text Block]

Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income—Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, which requires entities to provide information about the amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component. In addition, entities are required to present, either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or in the notes, significant amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by the respective line items of net income but only if the amount reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified to net income in its entirety in the same reporting period. For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income, entities are required to cross-reference to other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are described below:

The following table details the activity of the single component that comprises accumulated other comprehensive loss (in thousands).

Foreign currency translation	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period	$	(74	)	$	(110	)
Less: reclassification to net loss		172			-
Accumulated other comprehensive income	$	98		$	(110	)

In March 2013, FASB issued ASU No. 2013-05, Foreign Currency Matters—Parent’s Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity, which allows an entity to release cumulative translation adjustment into net income when a parent either sells a part or all of its investment in a foreign entity or no longer holds a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary or group of assets that is a nonprofit activity or a business within a foreign entity. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are included in Note 6.

In April 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-07, Liquidation Basis of Accounting, which require an entity to use the liquidation basis of accounting to present its financial statements when it determines that liquidation is imminent, unless the liquidation is the same as that under the plan specified in an entity’s governing documents created at its inception. Liquidation is imminent when the likelihood is remote that the entity will return from liquidation and either (a) a plan for liquidation is approved by the person or persons with the authority to make such a plan effective and the likelihood is remote that the execution of the plan will be blocked by other parties or (b) a plan for liquidation is being imposed by other forces (for example, involuntary bankruptcy). These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Entities should apply the requirements prospectively from the day that liquidation becomes imminent. Management is currently evaluating the impact of this amendment on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-11, Income Taxes—Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists, which provides that an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion thereof, should be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, except to the extent that a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available at the reporting date to settle any additional income taxes that would result from disallowance of a tax position, or the tax law does not require the entity to use, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, then the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented as a liability. These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Management does not expect the adoption of these changes to have a material impact on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

XML

Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Details) - Estimated Future Amortization Expense Related to Other Intangible Asset (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013
Estimated Future Amortization Expense Related to Other Intangible Asset [Abstract]
2014	$ 570
2015	562
	$ 1,132

XML

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Details) - Allowance for Doubtful Accounts (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Allowance for Doubtful Accounts [Abstract]
Balance	$ 393	$ 115
Provision for doubtful accounts	9,303	375
Write-offs	(3,809)	(97)
Balance	$ 5,887	$ 393

XML

Note 4 - Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Guidance (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Accounting Changes and Error Corrections [Abstract]

Schedule of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Table Text Block]

Foreign currency translation	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period	$	(74	)	$	(110	)
Less: reclassification to net loss		172			-
Accumulated other comprehensive income	$	98		$	(110	)

XML

Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Deconsolidation [Abstract]

Components of Gain on Deconsolidation [Table Text Block]

Adjust SGT’s negative net assets to zero	$	6,127
Reclassify net liabilities forgiven by LDK to additional paid in capital		(1,980	)
Write-off of advance to SGT		(438	)
Reclassify cumulative foreign currency translation to the statement of operations		(172	)
Gain on deconsolidation	$	3,537

XML

Note 1 - Description of Business and Basis of Presentation

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Disclosure Text Block [Abstract]

Business Description and Basis of Presentation [Text Block]

1.            Description of Business and Basis of Presentation

Description of Business

Solar Power, Inc. and its subsidiaries (collectively the “Company”) consist of the combination of the legacy reporting entity Solar Power, Inc. and Solar Green Technology S.p.A. (“SGT”) and their respective subsidiaries. Refer to Note 5 and 6 for further details of the accounting impact of the SGT acquisition and deconsolidation.

The Company is a global solar energy facility (“SEF”) developer offering our own brand of high-quality, low-cost distributed generation and utility-scale SEF development services. Primarily, the Company partners with developers around the world who hold large portfolios of SEF projects for whom it serves as co-developer and engineering, procurement and construction (“EPC”) contractor. The Company builds three basic types of SEFs: rooftop systems, ground mounted systems, and parking shade structure systems. The Company’s proprietary SkyMount® commercial rooftop racking system and its custom parking shade structures are procured through contract manufacturers and built to the Company’s design specifications are still being used for current projects under development.

In addition to designing, engineering and constructing large-scale SEFs, the Company also provides long-term operations and maintenance (“O&M”) services through our proprietary O&M program SPIGuardianTM. This service program provides a comprehensive suite of services that engage upon a facility’s commissioning to provide performance monitoring, system reporting, preventative maintenance and full warranty support over the anticipated life of the SEF. While the Company still considers its O&M services to be within its core competencies, it has obtained third party outsourcing for these services to assist in the reduction of operating expenses.

On January 5, 2011, the Company entered into a stock purchase agreement with LDK Solar Co., Ltd. (“LDK”), a vertically integrated solar wafer, cell and solar module manufacturer. On March 31, 2011, LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. by making a significant investment in our business that provided working capital and broader relationships that allowed us to more aggressively pursue commercial and utility projects globally. LDK’s modules are used in the majority of the systems the Company produces; however, it maintains relationships with other module manufacturers when circumstances call for an alternative to LDK’s line of modules.

Basis of Presentation

The Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company are prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) and require management to make certain judgments, estimates and assumptions. These may affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements. They also may affect the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Key estimates used in the preparation of our financial statements include: contract percentage-of-completion and cost estimates, construction in progress, allowance for doubtful accounts, stock-based compensation, warranty reserve, deferred taxes, valuation of inventory, and valuation of other intangible assets. Actual results could differ from those estimates upon subsequent resolution of identified matters.

The accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business. The realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business are dependent on, among other things, the Company’s ability to operate profitably, to generate cash flows from operations, and to pursue financing arrangements to support its working capital requirements.

XML

Note 7 - Balance Sheet Component (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Disclosure Text Block Supplement [Abstract]

Schedule of Accrued Liabilities [Table Text Block]

	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
Customer deposits	$	-	$	3,592
Capital lease obligation—current portion (1)		-		689
Product warranty liability—current portion (2)		200		200
Other		541		2,055
	$	741	$	6,536

XML

Note 18 - Fair Value of Financial Instruments (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Fair Value Disclosures [Abstract]

Fair Value, by Balance Sheet Grouping [Table Text Block]

	December 31, 2013				December 31, 2012
	Carrying value		Fair value		Carrying value		Fair value
Cash and cash equivalents	$	1,031	$	1,031	$	17,823	$	17,823
Notes receivable, current		8,450		8,450		14,120	$	14,120
Notes receivable, noncurrent		13,668		13,668		-	$	-
Line of credit and Loans Payable		4,250		4,250		39,478	$	39,478

XML

Note 10 - Investment in Affiliates (Details) (USD $)	12 Months Ended			12 Months Ended	1 Months Ended	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2013 Exchange and Release Agreement [Member] KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Mountain Creek Project [Member] Exchange and Release Agreement [Member] KDC Solar RTC, LLC [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Mountain Creek Project [Member] Exchange and Release Agreement [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 Mountain Creek Project [Member]	Nov. 30, 2013 Mountain Creek Project [Member]
Note 10 - Investment in Affiliates (Details) [Line Items]
Financing Receivable, Net	$ 8,450,000	$ 14,120,000	$ 15,000,000
Percent Ownership of Counterparty in Exchange for Note Receivable Due					64.50%
Percentage of Construction Completed							25.00%
Managing Member Interest Percentage				35.50%
Investments in and Advances to Affiliates, Balance, Principal Amount				7,500,000
Fair Value Inputs, Discount Rate	10.00%
Asset Impairment Charges	7,500,000	6,038,000		7,500,000
Costs in Excess of Billings		31,423,000				0		2,700,000
Provision for Loan and Lease Losses						$ 2,700,000

XML

Note 15 - Line of Credit and Loans Payable (Details)											4 Months Ended	12 Months Ended	1 Months Ended					12 Months Ended			3 Months Ended			3 Months Ended				1 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013 USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2011 United States of America, Dollars Line of Credit [Member] China Development Bank [Member]	Dec. 30, 2011 United States of America, Dollars China Development Bank [Member] First Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2011 United States of America, Dollars China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2011 China, Yuan Renminbi Line of Credit [Member] China Development Bank [Member]	Dec. 30, 2011 China, Yuan Renminbi China Development Bank [Member] First Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2011 China, Yuan Renminbi China Development Bank [Member] First Facility Agreement [Member] CNY	Dec. 30, 2011 China, Yuan Renminbi China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2011 China, Yuan Renminbi China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] CNY	Sep. 30, 2012 Requirement Not Met [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Line of Credit [Member] Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 26, 2011 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Sep. 30, 2013 Cathay Bank [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Feb. 15, 2012 Cathay Bank [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Italian Financial Institutions [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 Italian Financial Institutions [Member] EUR (€)	Dec. 31, 2012 China Development Bank [Member] Loans Payable [Member] USD ($)	Mar. 31, 2012 China Development Bank [Member] First Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2013 China Development Bank [Member] First Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 China Development Bank [Member] First Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Jun. 30, 2012 China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Jun. 30, 2012 China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] CNY	Dec. 31, 2013 China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 31, 2012 China Development Bank [Member] Second Facility Agreement [Member] USD ($)	Dec. 30, 2011 China Development Bank [Member]
Note 15 - Line of Credit and Loans Payable (Details) [Line Items]
Line of Credit Facility, Current Borrowing Capacity													$ 9,000,000
Line of Credit Facility, Percentage of Amount Outstanding to be Extended													70.00%
Debt Instrument, Basis Spread on Variable Rate												2.00%	1.25%
Line of Credit Facility Profit Covenant											1,000,000
Line of Credit Facility, Maximum Borrowing Capacity				3,600,000	15,600,000		11,900,000	72,150,000	12,900,000	77,850,000						7,000,000		5,100,000	4,000,000
Debt Instrument, Floor Rate												6.00%
Debt Instrument, Periodic Payment, Principal												500,000
Debt Instrument, Interest Rate, Stated Percentage															11.00%
Line of Credit Facility, Amount Outstanding														4,250,000		4,400,000	9,000,000	4,400,000				0	0			0	27,900,000
Debt Instrument, Interest Rate, Stated Percentage Rate Range, Minimum																		4.40%	4.40%
Debt Instrument, Interest Rate, Stated Percentage Rate Range, Maximum																		9.90%	9.90%
Front End Fee Percent			1.50%			1.50%
Line of Credit Facility, Unused Capacity, Commitment Fee Percentage																												0.50%
Repayments of Lines of Credit																					3,600,000
Line of Credit Facility, Increase (Decrease), Net																								12,300,000	77,850,000
Assets, Current	$ 24,127,000	$ 141,014,000																		$ 22,600,000

XML

Consolidated Balance Sheets (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Current assets:
Cash and cash equivalents	$ 1,031	$ 17,823
Accounts receivable, net of allowance for doubtful accounts of $5,887 and $393, respectively	6,260	43,807
Accounts receivable, related party	3,905	11,858
Notes receivable	8,450	14,120
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts		31,423
Construction in progress		16,078
Inventories, net	23	1,618
Prepaid expenses and other current assets	4,458	4,267
Restricted cash		20
Total current assets	24,127	141,014
Intangible assets	1,132	1,703
Restricted cash, net of current portion	400	400
Accounts receivable, noncurrent	12,349
Notes receivable, noncurrent	13,668
Property, plant and equipment at cost, net	11,752	18,754
Investment in affiliate	7,536
Other assets		958
Total assets	70,964	162,829
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable	3,919	15,709
Accounts payable, related party	50,907	51,804
Lines of credit	4,250	10,877
Accrued liabilities	741	6,536
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts	862	4,935
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts, related party		49
Loans payable and capital lease obligations		28,601
Total current liabilities	60,679	118,511
Financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion	11,730	18,760
Other liabilities	1,422	1,436
Total liabilities	73,831	138,707
Stockholders’ (deficit) equity:
Common stock, par $0.0001, 250,000,000 shares authorized; 198,214,456 shares issued and outstanding	20	20
Additional paid in capital	53,376	48,219
Accumulated other comprehensive loss	(189)	(287)
Accumulated deficit	(56,074)	(23,830)
Total stockholders’ (deficit) equity	(2,867)	24,122
Total liabilities and stockholders’ (deficit) equity	$ 70,964	$ 162,829

XML

Note 4 - Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Guidance (Details) - Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss Activity (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss Activity [Abstract]
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period	$ (74)	$ (110)
Less: reclassification to net loss	172
Accumulated other comprehensive income	$ 98	$ (110)

XML

Consolidated Statements of Stockholders' Equity (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data	Common Stock [Member]	Additional Paid-in Capital [Member]	Retained Earnings [Member]	Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) [Member]	Total
Balance at Dec. 31, 2011	$ 18	$ 47,929	$ 1,598	$ (177)	$ 49,368
Balance (in Shares) at Dec. 31, 2011	184,414
Net loss			(25,428)		(25,428)
Foreign currency translation adjustments				(110)	(110)
Issuance of restricted stock		106			106
Issuance of restricted stock (in Shares)	400
Issuance of common stock to acquire Solar Green Technology (See Note 5)	2	(253)			(251)
Issuance of common stock to acquire Solar Green Technology (See Note 5) (in Shares)	13,401
Issuance of warrants for financing		88			88
Stock-based compensation expense		349			349
Balance at Dec. 31, 2012	20	48,219	(23,830)	(287)	24,122
Balance (in Shares) at Dec. 31, 2012	198,215
Net loss			(32,244)		(32,244)
Foreign currency translation adjustments				98	98
Solar Green Technology debt forgiveness		4,582			4,582
Stock-based compensation expense		575			575
Balance at Dec. 31, 2013	$ 20	$ 53,376	$ (56,074)	$ (189)	$ (2,867)
Balance (in Shares) at Dec. 31, 2013	198,215				198,214,456

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) (USD $) In Millions, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Expiration Period	5 years
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Term	3 years 9 months	3 years 9 months
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Dividend Rate	0.00%	0.00%
Shares, Outstanding (in Shares)	198,214,456
Class of Warrant or Right, Outstanding (in Shares)	300,000
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award Option Exercise Price Threshold Percent	100.00%
Minimum Shareholder Percent	10.00%
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Nonvested Awards, Compensation Cost Not yet Recognized (in Dollars)	$ 0.6
Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Nonvested Awards, Compensation Cost Not yet Recognized, Period for Recognition	3 years 73 days
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Options, Vested in Period, Fair Value (in Dollars)	$ 0.7	$ 0.5
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Options, Exercises in Period (in Shares)	0	0
Stockholder With Greater Than 10% Shareholding [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award Option Exercise Price Threshold Percent	110.00%
Performance Shares [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Fair Value Assumptions, Expected Term	5 years
Time-based Options [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Award Vesting Rights, Percentage	25.00%
Time-based Options [Member] | Minimum [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Expiration Period	3 years
Time-based Options [Member] | Maximum [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Expiration Period	5 years
2006 Equity Incentive Plan [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Reserved Share, Percentage of Outstanding Shares	9.00%
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Number of Shares Authorized (in Shares)	2,000,000
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Number of Shares Available for Grant (in Shares)	10,370,106
Minimum [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Award Vesting Period	3 years
Maximum [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) [Line Items]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award, Award Vesting Period	4 years

XML

Note 12 - Stockholders' Equity (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Stockholders' Equity Note [Abstract]

Schedule of Stockholders' Equity Note, Warrants or Rights [Table Text Block]

	Shares			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term
Outstanding as of January 1, 2012		2,066,302			2.91		0.91
Issued		300,000			0.75		3.00
Exercised		-			-		-
Cancelled/expired		(2,066,302	)		2.91		-
Outstanding December 31, 2012		300,000			0.75		2.10
Issued		-					-
Exercised		-					-
Cancelled/expired		-					-
Outstanding December 31, 2013		300,000			0.75		1.10
Exercisable December 31, 2013		300,000		$	0.75		1.10

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Non-Vested Stock Awards (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Non-Vested Stock Awards [Line Items]
Granted	4,450,000	2,620,000
Granted, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.06	$ 0.33
Forfeited	(3,172,250)	(1,955,000)
Forfeited, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.47	$ 0.57
Time-based Options [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Non-Vested Stock Awards [Line Items]
Granted	4,450,000	2,620,000
Granted, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.06	$ 0.33
Vested	(802,750)	(1,187,875)
Vested, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.41	$ 0.51
Forfeited	(2,195,500)	(1,530,125)
Forfeited, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.64	$ 0.47
Non-vested	4,227,000	4,325,000
Non-vested, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.38	$ 0.41
Non-vested	5,678,750	4,227,000
Non-vested, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.13	$ 0.38
Restricted Stock [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Non-Vested Stock Awards [Line Items]
Granted		400,000
Granted, weighted average grant date fair value		$ 0.27
Vested		(400,000)
Vested, weighted average grant date fair value		$ 0.27

XML

Note 15 - Line of Credit and Loans Payable

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Debt Disclosure [Abstract]

Debt Disclosure [Text Block]

15.          Lines of Credit and Loans Payable 

Lines of Credit

On December 26, 2011, the Company entered into a Business Loan Agreement with Cathay Bank (“Cathay”) whereby Cathay agreed to extend the Company a line of credit of the lesser of $9.0 million or 70% of the aggregate amount in certain accounts receivable, which will mature December 31, 2012. LDK agreed to guaranty the full amount of the loan under a Commercial Guaranty by and between LDK and Cathay dated December 26, 2011. The interest rate under the loan is variable, 1.25% above the prime rate. In conjunction with the Business Loan Agreement, the Company and Cathay entered into a Commercial Security Agreement dated December 26, 2011 (“Cathay Security Agreement”), pursuant to which Cathay is granted a security interest in the collateral, which is certain accounts receivable. See Note 12 — Stockholders’ (Deficit) Equity regarding the warrants associated with the line of credit that were issued in February 2012.

Under the Business Loan Agreement, the Company is required to adhere to certain covenants, including a profitability requirement and financial statement ratio covenants. On June 15, 2012, the Company and Cathay executed a modification to the terms of the line of credit to adjust the required debt to worth ratio from three to one from two and one-half to one, and to subject all future advances to 70% of the receipts related to EPC agreements reviewed and approved by Cathay. Due to the accounting treatment related to the Aerojet 1 solar project development, the Company’s debt to worth covenant was in violation at December 31, 2011 and continues to be in violation until the related financial obligation is satisfied. The Company obtained a waiver from Cathay that excludes the financial impact of the Aerojet 1 transaction from the calculation of the debt to worth ratio through the term of the loan.

As of September 30, 2012, the Company was in violation of two other covenants. Due to the loss before income taxes for the three months ended September 30, 2012, the Company did not meet the minimum $1.0 million pre-tax profit covenant. As a result of the second quarter 2012 reclassification of the CDB loan from long-term to short-term, the Company did not meet the current ratio covenant. A notice of default was not issued by Cathay.

In December 2012, the Company amended the Business Loan Agreement with Cathay. Under the terms of the amended loan agreement, the facility amount was reduced to $7.0 million, with a variable interest rate of 2.0% above the prime rate and a 6% floor rate. The maturity date is extended to June 30, 2013 with monthly principal payments of $0.5 million due each month beginning December 30, 2012. The covenants were amended to include, among other items, the subordination of the net account payable due to LDK and elimination of minimum income and cash flow requirements.

In August, 2013, the Company entered into an agreement with Cathay whereby Cathay agreed, subject to certain conditions precedent, to forbear from foreclosing on the security interest securing the Loan Agreement until September 30, 2013. In connection with the forbearance, the Company agreed to pay Cathay the outstanding and unpaid balance of the loan on September 30, 2013. In addition, as of September 30, 2013, the interest rate under the loan equals 11%. All proceeds from the sale of projects and any payments received from KDC shall be applied to loan payment.

In November, 2013, the Company entered into another forbearance agreement with Cathay whereby Cathay agreed to forbear from foreclosing on the security interest securing the Loan Agreement until December 31, 2013. In connection with the forbearance, the Company agreed to pay Cathay the outstanding and unpaid balance of the loan on December 31, 2013. The forbearance agreement expired on December 31, 2013 without payment being made. In March 2014, the Company received a formal notice of default and demand under the loan documents and forbearance agreement from Cathay Bank which requires the Company to repay the aggregate outstanding principal balance of the loan and unpaid interest.

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had a balance outstanding to Cathay on the line of credit of $4.25 million and $4.4 million, respectively, recorded in the current account lines of credit.

During 2012, SGT entered into various unsecured revolving credit agreements with six Italian financial institutions under which SGT could borrow up to 4.0 million Euros (approximately $5.1 million U.S. Dollars). Amounts borrowed for advances on customer invoices or for performance bonds to customers may be repaid and reborrowed after repayment. SGT is required to pay interest on outstanding borrowings at interest rates ranging from 4.4% to 9.9%, compounded quarterly. Repayment is due for each invoice advance upon repayment by the customer, up to 120 days from utilization of each facility. As of December 31, 2012, $4.4 million was outstanding under the revolving credit facilities, classified in the current account lines of credit.

Loans Payable

On December 30, 2011, SPI New Jersey entered into two facility agreements with CDB. The first Facility Agreement is for a $3.6 million facility and a RMB 72,150,000 ($11.9 million at current exchange rates) facility and relates to EPC Financing for one of the Company’s customers. No borrowings were drawn under the RMB 72,150,000 facility with CDB. The facility expired on December 31, 2012. The second Facility Agreement is for a $15.6 million facility and a RMB 77,850,000 ($12.9 million at current exchange rates) facility and relates to EPC financing for another project of the same customer. SPI New Jersey has twelve months to draw upon the facilities. The interest rate is a variable interest rate based on either LIBOR plus a margin, in the case of a loan under a U.S. dollar portion, or the standard RMB interest rate for similar loans, in the case of a loan under a RMB portion. The interest is payable every six months. Under each Facility Agreement, SPI New Jersey is obligated to pay a front-end fee of 1.5% of the total amount of the U.S. dollars portion of a Facility Agreement upon the first drawing under the U.S. dollars portion of that Facility Agreement. Further, SPI New Jersey is obligated to pay a front-end fee of 1.5% of the total amount of the RMB portion of a Facility Agreement upon the first drawing under the RMB portion of that Facility Agreement. Additionally, SPI New Jersey is obligated to pay a fee equal to 0.5% per annum of the available but undrawn funds. The loans under a facility may be prepaid in whole or in part. However, any repaid portion cannot be re-borrowed. The full amount outstanding under a facility is required to be paid in full twenty-four months from the date the facility was first utilized, which was December 2011. The loans outstanding under the facility also become payable on the occurrence of certain events, including a change of control of SPI New Jersey. During the three months ended March 31, 2012, SPI New Jersey repaid the first Facility Agreement of $3.6 million upon completion of the related solar development project. No amounts remain outstanding under the first Facility Agreement as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012. During the three months ended June 30, 2012, the Company drew down the remaining amount of RMB 77,850,000 (or $12.3 million in USD) under the second Facility Agreement. In December 2013, upon collection of its note receivable and related interest from customer KDC (see Note 8), the Company repaid the amounts outstanding and related interest under the loan payable in full. As of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the outstanding balance under the second facility agreement was none and $27.9 million, respectively, which was recorded in current loans payable and capital lease obligations.

On December 30, 2011, the Company and CDB entered into a Security Agreement (the “CDB Security Agreement”), whereby the Company granted CDB a security interest in certain collateral. The collateral relates to the Project Facilities financed and the electricity grid-connected photovoltaic, solar power generation facilities that are the subject of the EPC Contract with specified installed capacity. The carrying value of the assets were $22.6 million as of December 31, 2012. The CDB Security Agreement provided CDB with security for two term loan facilities that CBD, as lender, extended to a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, SPI Solar New Jersey, Inc. (“SPI New Jersey”) as discussed above (collectively, the “Facility Agreements” and each a “Facility Agreement”). Under the CDB Security Agreement, CDB may, among other rights involving the collateral, sell the collateral or withdraw funds from certain accounts of the Company in the event of a default under a Facility Agreement. The CDB Security Agreement terminated upon satisfaction in full of the obligations under the Facility Agreements.

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Disclosure of Compensation Related Costs, Share-based Payments [Abstract]

Disclosure of Share-based Compensation Arrangements by Share-based Payment Award [Table Text Block]

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
Employee stock options	$	575	$	349
Restricted stock grants		-		106
Total stock-based compensation expense	$	575	$	455

Schedule of Employee Service Share-based Compensation, Allocation of Recognized Period Costs [Table Text Block]

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
General and administrative	$	429	$	394
Sales, marketing and customer service		100		57
Engineering, design and product management		46		4
Total stock-based compensation expense		575		455
Tax effect on stock-based compensation expense		—		—
Total stock-based compensation expense after income taxes	$	575	$	455

Schedule of Share-based Payment Award, Stock Options, Valuation Assumptions [Table Text Block]

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Expected term		3.75			3.75
Risk-free interest rate	0.95%	-	1.2%	0.6%	-	0.89%
Expected volatility	106%	-	118%	101	-	103%
Expected dividend yield		0%			0%

Schedule of Share-based Compensation, Stock Options, Activity [Table Text Block]

	Shares			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term		Aggregate Intrinsic Value ($000)
Outstanding as of January 1, 2012		5,171,500		$	0.56
Granted		2,620,000			0.33
Exercised		—			—
Forfeited		(1,955,000	)		0.57
Outstanding as of December 31, 2012		5,836,500		$	0.45
Granted		4,450,000			0.06
Exercised		—			—
Forfeited		(3,172,250	)		0.47
Outstanding as of December 31, 2013		7,114,250		$	0.20		3.91	$	-
Vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2013		1,435,500		$	0.46		2.26	$	-
Vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013		7,114,250		$	0.20		3.91	$	-

Schedule of Share-based Compensation, Shares Authorized under Stock Option Plans, by Exercise Price Range [Table Text Block]

Range of exercise price			Shares Exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life		Weighted average exercise price		Aggregate Intrinsic (000s)
$1.24	-	$1.30		150,000		1.00	$	1.25	$	-
$0.70	-	$1.23		27,000		0.24		0.74		-
$0.23	-	$0.69		1,258,500		2.53		0.36		-
				1,435,500		2.26	$	0.46	$	-

Schedule of Nonvested Share Activity [Table Text Block]

	Time-based Options					Restricted Stock
	Shares			Weighted Average Exercise Price Per Share		Shares			Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Non-vested as of January 1, 2012		4,325,000		$	0.41		-		$	-
Granted		2,620,000			0.33		400,000			0.27
Vested		(1,187,875	)		0.51		(400,000	)		0.27
Forfeited		(1,530,125	)		0.47		-			-
Non-vested as of December 31, 2012		4,227,000		$	0.38		-			-
Granted		4,450,000			0.06		-			-
Vested		(802,750	)		0.41		-			-
Forfeited		(2,195,500	)		0.64		-			-
Non-vested as of December 31, 2013		5,678,750		$	0.13		-		$	-

Schedule of Share-based Compensation, Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units Activity [Table Text Block]

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value
Restricted stock units at January 1, 2012		925,868	$	0.79
Granted		400,000		0.27
Forfeited		-		-
Restricted stock units at December 31, 2012		1,325,868		0.63
Granted		-		-
Forfeited		-		-
Restricted stock units at December 31, 2013		1,325,868	$	0.63

XML

Note 17 - Operating Risk and Geographical Information

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Risks and Uncertainties [Abstract]

Concentration Risk Disclosure [Text Block]

17.          Operating Risk and Geographical Information

Concentrations of Credit Risk and Major Customers — A substantial percentage of the Company’s net revenue comes from sales made to a small number of customers to whom sales are typically made on an open account basis. Details of customers accounting for 10% or more of total net revenue for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 are as follows (in thousands):

	2013					2012
Customer	Revenue		% of Total Revenue			Revenue		% of Total Revenue
Related party sales, including North Palm Springs Investments LLC*	$	-		-	%	$	35,539		36	%
Taneo Fund Management Company		13,854		32	%		-
KDC Solar Credit LS, LLC		22,829		54	%		26,010		26	%
	$	36,683		86	%	$	61,549		62	%

*             North Palm Springs Investments, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK Solar USA, Inc.

Details of the accounts receivable, net, notes receivable, and costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts and construction in progress from the customers with the largest balances at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively are (in thousands):

	2013					2012
Customer	$		% of Total			$		% of Total
Related party sales, including North Palm Springs Investments LLC*	$	-		-	%	$	11,858		11	%
KDC Solar Credit LS, LLC		13,668		31	%		39,993		39	%
SDL Solar		7,056		16	%		-		-	%
Solar Hub		8,450		19	%		-		-	%
Taneo Fund Management Company		8,801		20	%		16,078		16
	$	37,975		86	%	$	67,929		66	%

*             North Palm Springs Investments, LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK Solar USA, Inc.

Geographical Information

Net sales by geographic location are as follows (in thousands):

Location (a)	2013		2012
United States	$	25,347	$	56,366
Greece		13,854		8,251
Italy		3,428		35,101
China		-		238
	$	42,629	$	99,956

(a) Sales are attributed to countries based on location of customer.

Geographic information, which is based upon physical location, for long-lived assets was as follows (in thousands):

Location	2013		2012
United States	$	11,750	$	12,845
Italy		-		5,905
China (including Hong Kong)		2		4
	$	11,752	$	18,754

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Details) - Income (Loss) Before Provision for Income Taxes by Geographic Locations (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Income (Loss) Before Provision for Income Taxes by Geographic Locations [Abstract]
United States	$ (20,887)	$ (20,924)
Foreign	(10,544)	(4,584)
	$ (31,431)	$ (25,508)

XML

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Cash flows from operating activities:
Net loss	$ (32,244)	$ (25,428)
Depreciation	1,283	1,062
Amortization	571	714
Stock-based compensation expense	575	349
Gain on deconsolidation	(3,537)
Bad debt expense	9,303	375
Provision for obsolete inventory		291
Provision for warranty		221
Gain on sales of fixed assets	(382)	(12)
Amortization of loan fees	307	174
Change in deferred taxes	(150)	387
Impairment of project assets	2,816	2,729
Impairment charges	7,500	6,038
Operating income from solar system subject to financing obligation	(1,183)	(1,000)
Changes in operating assets and liabilities, net of effects of subsidiary deconsolidation:
Accounts receivable	11,491	27,077
Accounts receivable, related party	3,823	12,877
Notes receivable	(27,931)
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billing on uncompleted contracts	28,692	(21,195)
Costs and estimated earnings in excess of billing on uncompleted contracts, related party		360
Construction in process	15,993	(18,807)
Inventories	1,025	6,067
Prepaid expenses and other assets	(899)	(3,127)
Accounts payable	(5,452)	3,534
Accounts payable, related party	7,815	(10,649)
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts	(4,066)	3,980
Billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts, related party	(49)	(2,943)
Accrued liabilities and other liabilities	(4,089)	2,529
Net cash from operating activities	11,212	(14,397)
Cash flows from investing activities:
Proceeds from repayment of notes receivable	7,007	2,286
Issuance of notes receivable	(1,335)	(10,544)
Proceeds from disposal or sale of fixed assets		424
Proceeds from sale of asset held for sale		1,500
Acquisitions of property, plant and equipment	(3)	(1,011)
Net cash from investing activities	5,669	(7,345)
Cash flows from financing activities:
Proceeds from line of credit and loans payable	2,666	26,474
Proceeds from sale leaseback		6,533
Decrease in restricted cash	20	538
Cash distributions in connection with the transfer of entities under common control		(251)
Principal payments on loans payable and capital lease obligations	(36,285)	(18,854)
Net cash from financing activities	(33,599)	14,440
Effect of exchange rate changes on cash	(74)	602
Decrease in cash and cash equivalents	(16,792)	(6,700)
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year	17,823	24,523
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year	1,031	17,823
Supplemental cash flow information:
Cash paid for interest	4,280	2,000
Cash paid for income taxes		516
Debt forgiveness from related party	4,582
Acquisition of an entity under common control financed with stock		6,031
Assignment of loan associated with asset held for sale		4,153
Conversion of notes receivable to investment in affiliate, net of impairment charge	$ 7,536

XML

Consolidated Balance Sheets (Parentheticals) (USD $) In Thousands, except Share data, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Allowance for doubtful accounts (in Dollars)	$ 5,887	$ 393
Preferred stock par value (in Dollars per share)	$ 0.0001	$ 0.0001
Preferred stock, shares authorized	20,000,000	20,000,000
Preferred stock, shares issued	0	0
Preferred stock, shares outstanding	0	0
Common stock par value (in Dollars per share)	$ 0.0001	$ 0.0001
Common stock, shares authorized	250,000,000	250,000,000
Common stock, shares issued	198,214,456	198,214,456
Common stock, shares outstanding	198,214,456	198,214,456

XML

Note 10 - Investment in Affiliates

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Investments in and Advances to Affiliates, Schedule of Investments [Abstract]

Investments in and Advances to Affiliates, Schedule of Investments [Text Block]

10.          Investment in Affiliates

In April 2012, the Company entered into an EPC agreement with KDC to construct a 5.4 MW photovoltaic solar electricity project located in Mountain Creek, New Jersey (the “Mountain Creek Project”). In December 2013, the Company entered into an exchange and release agreement with KDC and agreed to exchange its $15.0 million note receivable due to the Company from KDC under the EPC agreement for construction of the Mountain Creek Project in exchange for a 64.50% limited ownership interest in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC (the “LLC”). The LLC holds all of the assets of the Mountain Creek Project. The construction of the Mountain Creek Project was approximately 25% complete at December 31, 2013. KDC is the managing member and holds a 35.5% managing member interest in the LLC. KDC has the power to control and manage the business and affairs of the LLC and is the only member that has the authority to bind the LLC. The Company holds protective rights with respect to approving (1) a sale or transfer of the Project; (2) the acquisition of real estate not related to the Project; (3) a merger of the LLC with another entity; (4) the alteration of the primary purpose of the LLC; and (5) the addition of new members. The Company does not have the substantive ability to dissolve (liquidate) the LLC or otherwise remove the managing member. As a result, the Company does not have a controlling financial interest in the LLC. The Company accounts for its investment in the LLC using the equity method of accounting. The Company determined the fair value of its investment in the LLC was $7.5 million based on an income approach applying discounted cash flows to measure the fair value using a 10% discount rate. The Company also used a market approach by comparing the fair value to other similar sized MW photovoltaic solar electricity projects taking into consideration the expected time and cost to complete the project. As a result, the Company recorded a $7.5 million impairment charge in the Consolidated Statement of Operations during the year ended December 31, 2013. There were no earnings or losses of the investee included in the Company’s consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013.

Prior to the exchange and release agreement, the Company accumulated $2.7 million of costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on the uncompleted Mountain Creek project. As the costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings were not a part of the Company’s investment in the LLC, the Company recorded a $2.7 million provision for losses on contracts in the consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2013 and reducing the costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on the uncompleted contracts to $0 at December 31, 2013.

XML

Document And Entity Information (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Apr. 15, 2014	Jun. 30, 2013
Document and Entity Information [Abstract]
Entity Registrant Name	Solar Power, Inc.
Document Type	10-K
Current Fiscal Year End Date	--12-31
Entity Common Stock, Shares Outstanding		198,214,456
Entity Public Float			$ 5,946,434
Amendment Flag	false
Entity Central Index Key	0001210618
Entity Current Reporting Status	Yes
Entity Voluntary Filers	No
Entity Filer Category	Smaller Reporting Company
Entity Well-known Seasoned Issuer	No
Document Period End Date	Dec. 31, 2013
Document Fiscal Year Focus	2013
Document Fiscal Period Focus	FY

XML

Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Goodwill and Intangible Assets Disclosure [Abstract]

Goodwill and Intangible Assets Disclosure [Text Block]

11.          Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets

Goodwill

The carrying value of goodwill was $5.2 million at December 31, 2011, all of which was allocated to the Company’s single reportable segment. Of this balance, $4.7 million reflected the balance of Solar Power, Inc. carried by its parent company, LDK, as required under the accounting guidelines for a transfer of an entity under common control (refer to Note 5— Acquisition of Solar Green Technology). The Company evaluated the carrying value of its goodwill at December 31, 2011, and determined that no impairment of goodwill was identified. During the three months ended September 30, 2012, due primarily to the recent reduction in the Company’s market capitalization, the Company’s market value was significantly below its book value, thus triggering an impairment analysis. As a result of this analysis, the Company recorded a goodwill impairment charge of $5.2 million. As a result, the balance of goodwill as of December 31, 2012 was zero.

Other Intangible Assets

During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company determined that the carrying value of certain intangible assets related to customer relationships were no longer recoverable based on a discrete evaluation of the nature of the intangible assets, incorporating the effect of the Company’s recent decision to no longer maintain the customer relationships. As a result, the Company recorded an impairment charge of $0.1 million on its Consolidated Statement of Operations for the year ended December 31, 2012. The balance of intangible assets as of December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 was $1.1 million and $1.7 million, respectively.

Other intangible assets consisted of the following (in thousands):

	Useful Life (in months)		Gross		Impairment Charge			Accumulated Amortization			Net
As of December 31, 2013
Patent		57	$	2,700	$	-		$	(1,568	)	$	1,132
			$	2,700	$	-		$	(1,568	)	$	1,132
As of December 31, 2012
Patent		57	$	2,700	$	-		$	(997	)	$	1,703
Customer relationships		33		400		(148	)		(252	)		-
			$	3,100	$	(148	)	$	(1,249	)	$	1,703

As of December 31, 2013, the estimated future amortization expense related to other intangible assets is as follows (in thousands):

	Amount
Year
2014	$	570
2015		562
	$	1,132

XML

Note 19 - Related Party Transactions (Details) (USD $)	1 Months Ended		12 Months Ended			1 Months Ended				1 Months Ended
	Jun. 30, 2013	Apr. 30, 2013	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Sep. 30, 2012 Century Solar Jewel SA [Member]	Sep. 30, 2012 Moiac Solare Srl [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member]	Jun. 30, 2012 EPC Agreement with Terrasol [Member]
Note 19 - Related Party Transactions (Details) [Line Items]
Equity Method Investment, Ownership Percentage					40.00%
Revenue from Related Parties			$ 0	$ 35,539,000		$ 1,900,000				$ 16,100,000
Related Party Costs			0	32,617,000
Accounts Receivable, Related Parties, Current			3,905,000	11,858,000			3,900,000		11,900,000
Accounts Payable, Related Parties, Current			50,907,000	51,804,000				50,900,000	51,800,000
Gains (Losses) on Extinguishment of Debt	2,600,000	2,600,000	4,582,000
Deconsolidation. Net Liabilities	$ 2,000,000	$ 2,000,000	$ 2,000,000

XML

Consolidated Statement of Operations (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Net sales:
Net sales	$ 42,629,000	$ 64,417,000
Net sales, related party	0	35,539,000
Total net sales	42,629,000	99,956,000
Cost of goods sold:
Cost of goods sold	42,582,000	56,016,000
Cost of goods sold, related party	0	32,617,000
Provision for losses on contracts	2,816,000	2,729,000
Total cost of goods sold	45,398,000	91,362,000
Gross (loss) profit	(2,769,000)	8,594,000
Operating expenses:
General and administrative	17,534,000	13,061,000
Sales, marketing and customer service	2,050,000	10,647,000
Impairment charges	7,500,000	6,038,000
Engineering, design and product management	1,761,000	2,636,000
Total operating expenses	28,845,000	32,382,000
Operating loss	(31,614,000)	(23,788,000)
Other (expense) income:
Interest expense	(4,321,000)	(4,065,000)
Interest income	1,655,000	2,527,000
Gain from deconsolidation	3,537,000
Other expense	(688,000)	(182,000)
Total other income (expense), net	183,000	(1,720,000)
Loss before income taxes	(31,431,000)	(25,508,000)
Provision for (benefit from) income taxes	813,000	(80,000)
Net loss	$ (32,244,000)	$ (25,428,000)
Net loss per common share:
Basic and Diluted (in Dollars per share)	$ (0.16)	$ (0.13)
Weighted average number of common shares used in computing per share amounts:
Basic and Diluted (in Shares)	198,214,456	190,461,696

XML

Note 5 - Acquisition of Solar Green Technology

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Disclosure Text Block Supplement [Abstract]

Mergers, Acquisitions and Dispositions Disclosures [Text Block]

5.            Acquisition of Solar Green Technology

On June 27, 2012, Solar Power, Inc. entered into an Acquisition and Stock Purchase Agreement dated as of June 25, 2012 (the “SGT Agreement”) with the shareholders of SGT, an Italian-based limited liability company. Under the SGT Agreement, Solar Power, Inc. acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding shares of SGT from SGT shareholders in exchange for 5.0 million Euros (approximately $6.3 million U.S. Dollars) payable in cash and common stock of the Company (the “Purchase Price”). The shareholders of SGT consisted of LDK Solar Europe Holding S.A (“LDK Europe”) and the two founders of SGT. LDK Europe, through its 70% ownership of the outstanding common stock of SGT, controlled SGT prior to the close of the transaction. LDK Europe is a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK, which owned approximately 71% of the issued and outstanding common stock of the Company prior to and after the date of the acquisition of SGT. In July 2012, the Company issued 9,771,223 shares of its Common Stock to LDK Europe and 1,814,655 shares of its Common Stock to each of the two founders of SGT. In addition, the Company agreed to pay each of the two founders 100,000 Euros in cash, the payments of which were made in July 2012. The amount of shares of the Company’s Common Stock that were issued under the SGT Agreement were determined by calculating the amount of the Purchase Price payable to each shareholder divided by the daily volume-weighted average price of the Company’s Common Stock for each of the 90 trading days prior to June 11, 2012.

Because SGT and Solar Power, Inc. were under the common control of LDK as of the June 27, 2012 acquisition date, the acquisition is treated as a transaction between entities under common control. In accordance with ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations these financial statements reflect the combination of Solar Power, Inc. and SGT’s financial statements for all periods presented under which both entities were under the common control of LDK. The predecessor entity was determined to be SGT due to the fact that SGT was the first entity controlled by LDK. LDK obtained a controlling interest in SGT on July 10, 2009. LDK obtained a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011. As such, the Company recognized the assets and liabilities of SGT (the accounting receiving entity) at their historical carrying values in accordance with U.S. GAAP and recast the assets and liabilities of the legacy Solar Power, Inc. entity (the transferring entity) to reflect carrying value of the parent, LDK, which were stepped up to fair value on March 31, 2011 upon LDK obtaining a controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. Refer to Note 11 —Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets for details of the balances carried by LDK now reflected in the Consolidated Financial Statements. Upon LDK acquiring its controlling interest in Solar Power, Inc. on March 31, 2011, the equity of the new reporting entity for the combined financial statements of Solar Power, Inc. and SGT reflects the Preferred and Common Stock of Solar Power, Inc. and associated additional paid-in capital and SGT’s retained earnings and foreign currency translation at March 31, 2011. Adjustments to eliminate the capital share accounts of SGT were recorded to additional paid-in capital.

XML

Note 4 - Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Accounting Changes and Error Corrections [Abstract]

Accounting Changes and Error Corrections [Text Block]

4.            Recently Adopted and Recently Issued Accounting Guidance

In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, Comprehensive Income—Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, which requires entities to provide information about the amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by component. In addition, entities are required to present, either on the face of the statement where net income is presented or in the notes, significant amounts reclassified out of accumulated other comprehensive income by the respective line items of net income but only if the amount reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified to net income in its entirety in the same reporting period. For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income, entities are required to cross-reference to other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about those amounts. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are described below:

The following table details the activity of the single component that comprises accumulated other comprehensive loss (in thousands).

Foreign currency translation	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period	$	(74	)	$	(110	)
Less: reclassification to net loss		172			-
Accumulated other comprehensive income	$	98		$	(110	)

In March 2013, FASB issued ASU No. 2013-05, Foreign Currency Matters—Parent’s Accounting for the Cumulative Translation Adjustment upon Derecognition of Certain Subsidiaries or Groups of Assets within a Foreign Entity or of an Investment in a Foreign Entity, which allows an entity to release cumulative translation adjustment into net income when a parent either sells a part or all of its investment in a foreign entity or no longer holds a controlling financial interest in a subsidiary or group of assets that is a nonprofit activity or a business within a foreign entity. The Company adopted these changes on January 1, 2013. The additional disclosures required by this ASU are included in Note 6.

In April 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-07, Liquidation Basis of Accounting, which require an entity to use the liquidation basis of accounting to present its financial statements when it determines that liquidation is imminent, unless the liquidation is the same as that under the plan specified in an entity’s governing documents created at its inception. Liquidation is imminent when the likelihood is remote that the entity will return from liquidation and either (a) a plan for liquidation is approved by the person or persons with the authority to make such a plan effective and the likelihood is remote that the execution of the plan will be blocked by other parties or (b) a plan for liquidation is being imposed by other forces (for example, involuntary bankruptcy). These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Entities should apply the requirements prospectively from the day that liquidation becomes imminent. Management is currently evaluating the impact of this amendment on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

In July 2013, the FASB issued ASU 2013-11, Income Taxes—Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists, which provides that an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion thereof, should be presented in the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward, except to the extent that a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward is not available at the reporting date to settle any additional income taxes that would result from disallowance of a tax position, or the tax law does not require the entity to use, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, then the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented as a liability. These changes become effective for the Company on January 1, 2014. Management does not expect the adoption of these changes to have a material impact on the Consolidated Financial Statements.

XML

Note 16 - Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Text Block]

16.          Commitments and Contingencies

Commitments

Restricted cash —At December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had restricted bank deposits of $0.4 million. The restricted bank deposits consist of a reserve pursuant to our guarantees of Solar Tax Partners 1, LLC (“STP”) with the bank providing the debt financing on the Aerojet 1 solar generating facility (see below for additional details related to the Aerojet 1 development project).

Guarantee —On December 22, 2009, in connection with an equity funding of STP related to the Aerojet 1 solar development project, the Company along with STP’s other investors entered into a Guaranty (“Guaranty”) to provide the equity investor, Greystone Renewable Energy Equity Fund (“Greystone”), with certain guarantees, in part, to secure investment funds necessary to facilitate STP’s payment to the Company under the EPC. Specific guarantees made by Solar Power, Inc. include the following in the event of the other investors’ failure to perform under the operating agreement:

• Operating Deficit Loans—the Company would be required to loan Master Tenant or STP monies necessary to fund operations to the extent costs could not be covered by Master Tenant’s or STP’s cash inflows. The loan would be subordinated to other liabilities of the entity and earn no interest; and

• Exercise of Put Options—At the option of Greystone, the Company may be required to fund the purchase by Managing Member of Greystone’s interest in Master Tenant under an option exercisable for 9 months following a 63 month period commencing with operations of the Facility. The purchase price would be equal to the greater of the fair value of Greystone’s equity interest in Master Tenant or $1.0 million.

The Company has recorded on its Consolidated Balance Sheet the guarantees of $0.1 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, which approximates their fair value (refer to Note 18— Fair Value of Financial Instruments). These amounts, less related amortization, are included in accrued liabilities. These guarantees for the Aerojet 1 project are accounted for separately from the financing obligation related to the Aerojet 1 project because they are with different counterparties.

Financing Obligation —The guarantees associated with Aerojet 1 constitute a continuing involvement in the project. While the Company maintains its continuing involvement, it will apply the financing method and, therefore, has recorded and classified the proceeds received of $11.7 million and $12.9 million from the project in long-term liabilities within financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion, at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

Performance Guaranty — On December 18, 2009, the Company entered into a 10-year energy output guaranty related to the photovoltaic system installed for STP at the Aerojet 1 facility in Rancho Cordova, CA. The guaranty provided for compensation to STP’s system lessee for shortfalls in production related to the design and operation of the system, but excluding shortfalls outside the Company’s control such as government regulation. The Company believes that the probability of shortfalls is unlikely and if they should occur they would be covered under the provisions of its current panel and equipment warranty provisions. For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, there continues to be no charges against our reserves related to this performance guaranty.

Product Warranties —Solar Power, Inc. offers the industry standard of 25 years for our solar modules and industry standard five years on inverter and balance of system components. Due to the warranty period, Solar Power, Inc. bears the risk of extensive warranty claims long after the Company has shipped product and recognized revenue. In our cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business, historically our warranty claims have not been material. In our solar photovoltaic business, our greatest warranty exposure is in the form of product replacement. Until the third quarter of 2007, Solar Power, Inc. purchased its solar panels from third-party suppliers and since the third-party warranties are consistent with industry standards it considered our financial exposure to warranty claims immaterial. Certain photovoltaic construction contracts entered into during the year ended December 31, 2007 included provisions under which Solar Power, Inc. agreed to provide warranties to the buyer, and during the quarter ended September 30, 2007 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2010, Solar Power, Inc. installed its own manufactured solar panels. As a result, the Company recorded the provision for the estimated warranty exposure on these contracts within cost of sales. Since Solar Power, Inc. does not have sufficient historical data to estimate its exposure, it has looked to its own historical data in combination with historical data reported by other solar system installers and manufacturers. The Company now only installs panels manufactured by unrelated third parties and its parent, LDK. The Company provides the manufacturer’s pass through warranty, and reserves for unreimbursed costs, such as labor, material and transportation costs to replace panels and balance of system components provided by third-party manufacturers. The current portion is presented in accrued liabilities and the non-current portion is presented in the noncurrent account other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The accrual for warranty claims consisted of the following (in thousands):

	2013		2012
Beginning balance - January 1	$	1,537	$	1,679
Provision charged to warranty expense		-		221
Less: warranty claims		-		(363	)
Ending balance - December 31,		1,537		1,537
Current portion of warranty liability		200		200
Non-current portion of warranty liability	$	1,337	$	1,337

Operating leases — The Company leases facilities under various operating leases, some of which contain escalation clauses, which expire through 2017. The Company also leases vehicles under operating leases. Rental expenses under operating leases included in the statement of operations were $0.5 million and $0.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Future minimum payments under all of our non-cancelable operating leases are as follows as of December 31, 2013 (in thousands):

2014	$	171
2015		176
2016		182
2017		17
Thereafter		-
	$	546

Contingencies

Motech Industries, Inc. (“Motech”) filed a complaint against the Company on November 21, 2011, in the Superior Court of California, County of Sacramento, alleging that the Company breached a November 29, 2010 settlement agreement by failing to make payments set forth therein for products supplied to the Company by Motech. Motech has alleged causes of action for breach of contract and breach of the covenant of good faith and fair dealing seeking to recover a total of $339,544.15 in damages from the Company plus its attorneys’ fees and costs. The Company filed its answer on December 22, 2011 generally denying all of the allegations in Motech’s complaint. Specifically, the Company contended that it had paid Motech in full for all monies owed under the settlement agreement. On January 25, 2013, the Court denied Motech’s motion for summary judgment. During the quarter ended June 30, 2013, the parties settled the dispute and the Company paid a settlement amount to Motech in the amount of $150,000 to resolve the matter in exchange for a mutual release of all claims.

On July 26, 2013, we filed a complaint against Seashore Solar, Inc. and Seashore Solar Development, LLC (collectively “Seashore”) and KDC Solar RTC, LLC (“KDC”) in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Somerset County, under Docket No. SOM-C-12042-13. This lawsuit relates to a solar power project in Egg Harbor Township, New Jersey (the “project”). We sold solar panels to Seashore for use in the Project. The unpaid portion of the purchase price for the panels is approximately $2,800,000. We also entered into an EPC agreement with Seashore with regard to the Project. Seashore sold the Project to KDC and is no longer in a position to satisfy its obligations under the EPC agreement. We are seeking damages from Seashore for the unpaid solar panels and breach of the EPC agreement. The parties are in the process of negotiating a settlement agreement. The accounts receivable from Seashore Solar, Inc. is fully reserved as of December 31, 2013.

In November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. SGT currently has insufficient funds to fund the SGT liquidation process. Under the plan of liquidation the Company is obligated to fund 600,000 Euros as of December 31, 2013 of which LDK is responsible for 100,000 Euros. In the event SGT does not receive additional funds needed to proceed with the liquidation, SGT will likely be forced to file for bankruptcy protection. The Company accrued a liability for 500,000 Euros for the unpaid portion of its obligation to fund SGT’s liquidation at December 31, 2013.

From time to time, the Company is involved in various other legal and regulatory proceedings arising in the normal course of business. While the Company cannot predict the occurrence or outcome of these proceedings with certainty, it does not believe that an adverse result in any pending legal or regulatory proceeding, individually or in the aggregate, would be material to our consolidated financial condition or cash flows; however, an unfavorable outcome could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations for a specific interim period or year.

XML

Note 12 - Stockholders' Equity

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Stockholders' Equity Note [Abstract]

Stockholders' Equity Note Disclosure [Text Block]

12.          Stockholders’ (Deficit) Equity

Issuance of common stock

On June 8, 2012, the Company issued 400,000 shares of restricted Common Stock pursuant to the Company’s 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (defined below) as compensation to its non-employee directors. The fair value of the shares was $0.265 per share, the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on June 12, 2012, the date of the grant. The shares vested on the date of grant.

In July 2012, the Company issued 9,771,223 shares of its Common Stock to LDK Europe, a wholly-owned subsidiary of LDK, and 1,814,655 of its Common Stock to each of the two founders of SGT pursuant to the SGT Acquisition and Stock Purchase Agreement as part of an aggregate purchase price of 5.0 million Euros (approximately $6.3 million in U.S. Dollars at June 30, 2012). For further discussion of the transaction, refer to Note 5 —Acquisition of Solar Green Technology.

Issuance of warrants to purchase common stock

On February 15, 2012, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the issuance of a warrant agreement for Cathay General Bancorp to purchase 300,000 shares of the Company’s Common Stock at $0.75 per share related to the credit facility entered into with Cathay Bank for an original aggregate principal amount of $9.0 million. The fair value of $0.29 per share was determined using the Black-Scholes-Merton model. Assumptions used in calculating fair value were as follows: a risk free interest rate of .38%, expected volatility of 103%, zero expected dividend yield, and an expected term of 3 years. The warrant expires on February 15, 2015 and is exercisable anytime within that period for an exercise price of $0.75 per share. The value of the warrant will be amortized over the remaining term of the associated credit facility through December 31, 2012. For the year ended December 31, 2012, $87,000 was amortized to interest expense.

The following table summarizes the Company’s warrant activity:

	Shares			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term
Outstanding as of January 1, 2012		2,066,302			2.91		0.91
Issued		300,000			0.75		3.00
Exercised		-			-		-
Cancelled/expired		(2,066,302	)		2.91		-
Outstanding December 31, 2012		300,000			0.75		2.10
Issued		-					-
Exercised		-					-
Cancelled/expired		-					-
Outstanding December 31, 2013		300,000			0.75		1.10
Exercisable December 31, 2013		300,000		$	0.75		1.10

In April 2013, LDK forgave $2.6 million of debt by SGT which is recorded in additional paid in capital. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital.

XML

Note 8 - Accounts and Notes Receivable

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Receivables [Abstract]

Loans, Notes, Trade and Other Receivables Disclosure [Text Block]

8.            Accounts and Notes Receivable

During 2013, the Company recognized $13.9 million revenue under the completed-contract method and recorded a receivable of $8.8 million (originally denominated in euro’s) related to the sale of its Greece projects. Due to the delay in the customer receiving term financing from CDB, the receivable is currently being collected over a six year agreed upon payment schedule, plus variable interest. The difference of $5.1 million between revenue recognized and account receivable balance relates to prior payments received from the customer which had been recorded as a customer deposit within accrued liabilities. As of December 31, 2013, due to the extended collection period, $2.2 million of the accounts receivable is recorded as current and $6.6 million is recorded in accounts receivable, noncurrent. During the second quarter of 2013, the Company reclassified $5.9 million of existing accounts receivables from a second unrelated customer to noncurrent based on the expected collection period which is anticipated to exceed one year. As of December 31, 2013, the Company has $2.0 million recorded in accounts receivable, current and $5.8 million recorded in accounts receivable, noncurrent from this second customer.

The Company agreed to advance to customer KDC predevelopment and site acquisition costs related to the Imclone EPC agreement between KDC and the Company and recorded the amount as notes receivable. The terms of the EPC agreement require repayment of the advance upon final completion of the SEF, which was expected to occur in the first half of 2013 but is now expected to occur in the first half of 2014 as the project did not break ground until the second quarter of 2013. The advance bears interest at the rate of 5% per year that is payable at the time the principal is repaid. The advance and related interest was collected in full in December 2013 as KDC obtained term debt financing for the project in December 2013. As of December 31, 2013and 2012, the balance of the note receivable from this project was none and $7.0 million, respectively. These amounts are recorded in the current notes receivable.

During 2013 the Company issued a note receivable to KDC for one completed contract with 15 year payment terms which began on the commercial operations date which was April 2013. The note bears interest of LIBOR plus 460bps. If the customer obtains term debt financing for their project, the collection of the note receivable may be accelerated.  During 2013 the Company issued another note receivable to KDC for the Mountain Creek project that has not been completed. In December 2013, the Company entered into an exchange and release agreement with KDC and agreed to exchange this note receivable due in exchange for a 64.50% limited ownership interest in KDC Solar Mountain Creek Parent LLC (see Note 10). As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the balance recorded in noncurrent notes receivable related to this customer was $13.6 million and none, respectively.

On April 27, 2012, the Company made a secured loan of $1.0 million to Solar Hub Utilities, LLC (“Solar Hub”), to be used for pre-development costs, and recorded the amount in the account notes receivable. On June 8, 2012, the Company agreed to advance Solar Hub up to $9.0 million under a new $9.0 million secured promissory note, which refinanced the original $1.0 million advance and bears a 6% annual interest rate. In March 2013, the interest was changed to a 10% annual interest rate in accordance with the Amended and Restated Secured Promissory Note. This note receivable is secured by the project assets. Repayment in full of all borrowed amounts was due on December 31, 2012 but, in March 2013, was extended to a new maturity date of July 1, 2014 in accordance with the Amended and Restated Secured Promissory Note. As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the balance of the note receivable from Solar Hub was $8.4 million and $7.1 million, respectively.

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Consolidated Stock-Based Compensation Expense, by Type of Awards (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	$ 575,000	$ 455,000
Employee Stock Option [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	575,000	349,000
Restricted Stock [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense		106,000
Stock Compensation Plan [Member]
Share-based Compensation Arrangement by Share-based Payment Award [Line Items]
Stock-based compensation expense	$ 575,000	$ 455,000

XML

Note 6 - Deconsolidation of SGT

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Deconsolidation [Abstract]

Deconsolidation [Text Block]

6.            Deconsolidation of Solar Green Technology

In November 2013, the board of directors of SGT approved a voluntary plan for liquidation. On December 30, 2013, the board of directors of SGT appointed a liquidator. Under Italian regulations, the liquidation process is controlled and carried out by the liquidator and the Company has no ability to exercise influence over SGT. As a result of these actions, the Company deconsolidated SGT on December 30, 2013 when the Company ceased to have a controlling financial interest in SGT. The Company recognized a gain on deconsolidation of $3.5 million which was recognized in other income in the statement of operations as the liquidation is a run-off of operations. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital.

The Components of the gain on deconsolidation are as follows (in thousands):

Adjust SGT’s negative net assets to zero	$	6,127
Reclassify net liabilities forgiven by LDK to additional paid in capital		(1,980	)
Write-off of advance to SGT		(438	)
Reclassify cumulative foreign currency translation to the statement of operations		(172	)
Gain on deconsolidation	$	3,537

The fair value of the Company’s retained investment in SGT is zero at December 31, 2013. SGT will remain a related party of the Company.

XML

Note 7 - Balance Sheet Component

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Disclosure Text Block Supplement [Abstract]

Supplemental Balance Sheet Disclosures [Text Block]

7.            Balance Sheet Component

Accrued liabilities (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
Customer deposits	$	-	$	3,592
Capital lease obligation—current portion (1)		-		689
Product warranty liability—current portion (2)		200		200
Other		541		2,055
	$	741	$	6,536

(1) The noncurrent portion of the capital lease obligation is recorded in financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion.

(2) The noncurrent portion of the product warranty liability is recorded in other liabilities.

XML

Note 9 - Property, Plant and Equipment

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]

Property, Plant and Equipment Disclosure [Text Block]

9.            Property, Plant and Equipment

Property, plant and equipment consisted of the following (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
PV solar systems	$	14,852		$	20,783
Plant and machinery		33			33
Furniture, fixtures and equipment		269			388
Computers and software		1,153			1,499
Trucks		-			44
Leasehold improvements		4			96
		16,311			22,843
Less: accumulated depreciation		(4,559	)		(4,089	)
	$	11,752		$	18,754

In 2009, Solar Power, Inc. capitalized a photovoltaic (“PV”) solar system relating to the Aerojet 1 solar development project along with the associated financing obligation, recorded under financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion, in the Consolidated Balance Sheets. Due to certain guarantee arrangements as disclosed in Note 16— Commitments and Contingencies, the Company will continue to record this solar system in property, plant and equipment with its associated financing obligation in financing obligations as long as it maintains its continuing involvement with this project. The income and expenses relating to the underlying operation of the Aerojet 1 project are recorded in the Consolidated Statement of Operations.

During the year ended December 31, 2011, the Company’s subsidiary, SGT, completed construction of two SEFs, which was classified as held for sale as of December 31, 2011. In May 2012, SGT sold to and leased back the assets from a leasing company. The gross amount of assets recorded under the capital leases was $5.9 million, with accumulated depreciation of $0.2 million, as of December 31, 2012. The SEFs were classified as PV solar systems under capital leases, which were recorded in Financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion, on the Consolidated Balance Sheet at December 31, 2012. The SEFs were removed from the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheet in 2013 in connection with the Company’s deconsolidation of SGT.

Depreciation expense was $1.3 million and $1.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Exercise Price and Remaining Life Information about Options Exercisable (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013
Share-based Compensation, Shares Authorized under Stock Option Plans, Exercise Price Range [Line Items]
Shares exercisable (in Shares)	1,435,500
Weighted average remaining contractual life	2 years 94 days
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.46
Range 1 [Member]
Share-based Compensation, Shares Authorized under Stock Option Plans, Exercise Price Range [Line Items]
Exercise price range, lower limit	$ 1.24
Exercise price range, upper limit	$ 1.30
Shares exercisable (in Shares)	150,000
Weighted average remaining contractual life	1 year
Weighted average exercise price	$ 1.25
Range 2 [Member]
Share-based Compensation, Shares Authorized under Stock Option Plans, Exercise Price Range [Line Items]
Exercise price range, lower limit	$ 0.70
Exercise price range, upper limit	$ 1.23
Shares exercisable (in Shares)	27,000
Weighted average remaining contractual life	87 days
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.74
Range 3 [Member]
Share-based Compensation, Shares Authorized under Stock Option Plans, Exercise Price Range [Line Items]
Exercise price range, lower limit	$ 0.23
Exercise price range, upper limit	$ 0.69
Shares exercisable (in Shares)	1,258,500
Weighted average remaining contractual life	2 years 193 days
Weighted average exercise price	$ 0.36

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Restricted Stock Awards (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Restricted Stock Awards [Line Items]
Granted	4,450,000	2,620,000
Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) [Member]
Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Restricted Stock Awards [Line Items]
Restricted stock units		925,868
Restricted stock units, weighted average grant date fair value		$ 0.79
Granted		400,000
Granted, weighted average grant date fair value		$ 0.27
Restricted stock units	1,325,868	1,325,868
Restricted stock units, weighted average grant date fair value	$ 0.63	$ 0.63

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation (Details) - Stock Option Activities (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Stock Option Activities [Abstract]
Outstanding	7,114,250	5,836,500	5,171,500
Outstanding, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.20	$ 0.45	$ 0.56
Outstanding, weighted average remaining contractual term	3 years 332 days
Granted	4,450,000	2,620,000
Granted, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.06	$ 0.33
Forfeited	(3,172,250)	(1,955,000)
Forfeited, weighted average exercise price per share	$ 0.47	$ 0.57
Vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2013	1,435,500
Vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2013	$ 0.46
Vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2013	2 years 94 days
Vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013	7,114,250
Vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013	$ 0.20
Vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013	3 years 332 days

XML

Note 11 - Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Goodwill and Intangible Assets Disclosure [Abstract]

Schedule of Finite-Lived Intangible Assets [Table Text Block]

	Useful Life (in months)		Gross		Impairment Charge			Accumulated Amortization			Net
As of December 31, 2013
Patent		57	$	2,700	$	-		$	(1,568	)	$	1,132
			$	2,700	$	-		$	(1,568	)	$	1,132
As of December 31, 2012
Patent		57	$	2,700	$	-		$	(997	)	$	1,703
Customer relationships		33		400		(148	)		(252	)		-
			$	3,100	$	(148	)	$	(1,249	)	$	1,703

Schedule of Finite-Lived Intangible Assets, Future Amortization Expense [Table Text Block]

	Amount
Year
2014	$	570
2015		562
	$	1,132

XML

Note 9 - Property, Plant and Equipment (Details) (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Property, Plant and Equipment [Abstract]
Capital Leased Assets, Gross		$ 5,900,000
Capital Leases, Lessee Balance Sheet, Assets by Major Class, Accumulated Depreciation		200,000
Depreciation	$ 1,283,000	$ 1,062,000

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Income Tax Disclosure [Abstract]

Income Tax Disclosure [Text Block]

14.          Income Taxes

(Loss) income before provision for income taxes is attributable to the following geographic locations for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	2013			2012
United States	$	(20,887	)	$	(20,924	)
Foreign		(10,544	)		(4,584	)
	$	(31,431	)	$	(25,508	)

The provision(benefit) for income taxes consists of the following for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	2013			2012
Current:
Federal	$	-		$	(46	)
State		7			(21	)
Foreign		979			(395	)
Total current		986			(462	)
Deferred:
Federal		-			-
State		-			-
Foreign		(173	)		382
Total deferred		(173	)		382
Total provision(benefit) for income taxes	$	813		$	(80	)

The provision for income taxes for the year ended December 31, 2013 was primarily the result of the SGT liquidation and the related charge off of the asset created by the elimination of the intercompany gain created by the sale of an asset between the Company and SGT during 2012.

The reconciliation between the actual income tax expense and income tax computed by applying the statutory U.S. Federal income tax rate of 35% to pre-tax (loss) income before provision for income taxes for the years ended December 31 is as follows (in thousands):

	2013			2012
Provision for income taxes at U.S. Federal statutory rate	$	(11,001	)	$	(8,928	)
State taxes, net of federal benefit		4			(13	)
Foreign taxes at different rate		4,500			1,591
Non-deductible expenses		100			(68	)
Valuation allowance		7,078			4,843
Other		(114	)		631
Impairment		246			1,864
	$	813		$	(80	)

Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of loss carry forwards and temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. Significant components of the Company’s deferred tax assets and liabilities for federal, state and foreign income taxes are as follows at December 31 are presented below (in thousands):

	2013			2012
Deferred income tax assets:
Net operating loss carry forwards	$	25,458		$	17,602
Temporary differences due to accrued warranty costs		684			690
Temporary differences due to bonus and vacation accrual		33			94
Temporary differences due to construction in progress		-			1,316
Other temporary differences		595			142
Allowance for bad debts		2,474			54
Credits		16			16
		29,260			19,914
Valuation allowance		(29,260	)		(19,914	)
Total deferred income tax assets		-			-
Deferred income tax liabilities:
Other temporary differences		-			(173	)
Total deferred income tax liabilities		-			(173	)
Net deferred tax (liabilities) assets	$	-		$	(173	)

As of December 31, 2013, the Company had a net operating loss carry forward for federal income tax purposes of approximately $56.8 million, which will start to expire in the year 2027. The Company had a total state net operating loss carry forward of approximately $68.7 million, which will start to expire in the year 2017. The Company has a foreign net operating loss carry forward of $2.8 million, some of which begin to expire in 2017. The Company had a federal alternative minimum tax credit of $16,000, which does not expire.

Utilization of the federal and state net operating losses is subject to certain annual limitations due to the “change in ownership” provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and similar state provisions. However, the annual limitation is not anticipated to result in the expiration of net operating losses and credits before utilization.

The Company recognizes deferred tax assets if it is more likely than not that those deferred tax assets will be realized. Management reviews deferred tax assets periodically for recoverability and makes estimates and judgments regarding the expected geographic sources of taxable income in assessing the need for a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to their estimated realizable value. Realization of the Company’s deferred tax assets is dependent upon future earnings, if any, the timing and amount of which are uncertain. Because of the Company’s lack of earnings history, the net deferred tax assets have been fully offset by a valuation allowance. The valuation allowance increased by $9.4 million and $7.1 million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

The Company has no unremitted foreign earnings from Hong Kong and immaterial foreign retained earnings from the PRC.

The Company currently files income tax returns in the U.S., as well as California, New Jersey, and certain other foreign jurisdictions. The Company is currently not the subject of any income tax examinations. The Company’s tax returns remain open for examination for years after December 31, 2008.

The Company had no unrecognized tax benefits for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

XML

Note 19 - Related Party Transactions

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Related Party Transactions [Abstract]

Related Party Transactions Disclosure [Text Block]

19.          Related Party Transactions

In September 2012, SGT transferred its interest in its wholly owned subsidiary, Moiac Solare Srl (“Moiac”), to Terrasol Solar SA (“Terrasol”). Terrasol’s parent, Century Solar Jewel SA is 40% owned by LDK Solar Europe Holding SA, a wholly owned subsidiary of LDK. The total contract value from the EPC agreements for the construction of 641kW solar development projects owned by Moiac is $1.9 million.

In June 2012, SGT began construction on multiple solar development projects under EPC agreements with Terrasol. The total contract value from the construction of these solar development projects is $16.1 million.

During the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company recorded net sales to LDK, NPSLLC and Terrasol of none and $35.5 million, respectively, with a cost of goods sold of none and $32.6 million, respectively, primarily consisting of solar development costs. As of December 31, 2013, accounts receivable from LDK was $3.9 million primarily related to the receivables from solar development projects with and inventory sale to LDK in prior year. As of December 31, 2012, accounts receivable from LDK was $11.9 million primarily related to the receivables from solar development projects with and inventory sale to LDK.

As of December 31, 2013 and 2012, the Company had accounts payable to LDK of $50.9 million and $51.8 million, respectively, primarily related to purchases of solar panels for solar development projects. See Note 2 — Going Concern Considerations and Management’s Plan for further discussion related to the accounts payables with LDK. The Company and LDK have agreed to the right of setoff for all intercompany receivables and payables.

In June 2013, LDK forgave $2.6 million in indebtedness to provide an injection of capital to SGT to keep their shareholder capital from going negative and triggering liquidity accounting under Italian statutory law. Additionally, the Company deconsolidated net liabilities owned by SGT to LDK of $2.0 million. As LDK is the Company’s parent company, this portion of the deconsolidation was treated as debt forgiveness and a capital transaction recorded as an increase to additional paid in capital. Refer to Note 6 for further details of the SGT deconsolidation.

XML

Note 7 - Balance Sheet Component (Details) - Accrued Liabilities (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	Dec. 31, 2013		Dec. 31, 2012
Accrued Liabilities [Abstract]
Customer deposits			$ 3,592
Capital lease obligation—current portion (1)		[1]	689	[1]
Product warranty liability—current portion (2)	200	[2]	200	[2]
Other	541		2,055
	$ 741		$ 6,536

[1] The noncurrent portion of the capital lease obligation is recorded in financing and capital lease obligations, net of current portion.

[2] The noncurrent portion of the product warranty liability is recorded in other liabilities.

XML

Note 2 - Going Concern Considerations and Management's Plan (Details) (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011	Mar. 25, 2014 Subsequent Event [Member] Cathay Bank [Member]	Dec. 31, 2013 LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member]	Dec. 31, 2012 LDK Solar Co., Ltd. [Member]
Note 2 - Going Concern Considerations and Management's Plan (Details) [Line Items]
Net Income (Loss), Including Portion Attributable to Noncontrolling Interest	$ (32,244,000)	$ (25,428,000)
Retained Earnings (Accumulated Deficit)	(56,074,000)	(23,830,000)
Working Capital	(36,600,000)	22,400,000
Percentage of Common Stock Outstanding Owned by Parent Company	71.00%
Accounts Payable, Related Parties					50,900,000	51,800,000
Line of Credit Facility, Amount Outstanding				4,250,000
Debt Instrument, Interest Rate, Stated Percentage				11.00%
Cash and Cash Equivalents, at Carrying Value	$ 1,031,000	$ 17,823,000	$ 24,523,000

XML

Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive (Loss) Income (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Net loss	$ (32,244)	$ (25,428)
Foreign currency translation loss arising during the period	(74)	(110)
Less: reclassification of foreign currency translation loss to net loss	172
Net change in accumulated other comprehensive loss	98	(110)
Comprehensive loss	$ (32,146)	$ (25,538)

XML

Note 3 - Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Accounting Policies [Abstract]

Significant Accounting Policies [Text Block]

3.            Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Principles of Consolidation – The Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of the Company and companies in which the Company has a controlling interest. Intercompany transactions have been eliminated. The equity method of accounting is used for investments in affiliates and other joint ventures over which the Company has significant influence but does not have effective control. Investments in affiliates in which the Company cannot exercise significant influence are accounted for on the cost method.

Management also evaluates whether an interest is a variable interest entity and whether the Company is the primary beneficiary. Consolidation is required if both of these criteria are met. The Company does not have any variable interest entities requiring consolidation.

If the entity is not considered a variable interest entity, it is treated as a voting interest entity, and the Company applies the guidance of ASC 810-20 – “Control of Partnerships and Similar Entities”, in determining whether the entity should be consolidated. The Company does not hold interests in any partnerships or similar entities requiring consolidation.

Equity Method – Investee companies that are not consolidated, but over which the Company exercises significant influence, are accounted for under the equity method of accounting. Whether or not the Company exercises significant influence with respect to an Investee depends on an evaluation of several factors, including, among others, representation on the Investee company’s board of directors and ownership level. Under the equity method of accounting, an Investee company’s accounts are not reflected within the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets and Statements of Operations; however, the Company’s share of the earnings or losses of the Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Equity loss—share of Investee company losses’’ in the Consolidated Statements of Operations since the activities of the investee are closely aligned with the operations of our business segment. The Company’s carrying value in an equity method Investee company is reflected in the caption ““Investment in affiliates’’ in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. We evaluate our equity method investments whenever events or changes in circumstance indicate that the carrying amounts of such investments may be impaired. If a decline in the value of an equity method investment is determined to be other than temporary, a loss is recorded in earnings in the current period. There were no earnings or losses recorded from our equity method investment.

Cash and cash equivalents — Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, cash accounts, interest bearing savings accounts and all highly liquid investments with original maturities of three months or less, when purchased.

Inventories — Inventories are carried at the lower of cost or market, determined by the first in first out cost method. Work-in-progress and finished goods inventories consist of raw materials, direct labor and overhead associated with the manufacturing process. Provisions are made for obsolete or slow-moving inventories based on management estimates. Inventories are impaired based on the difference between the cost of inventories and the net realizable value based upon estimates about future demand from customers and specific customer requirements on certain projects. Inventory impairment charges establish a new cost basis for inventory and charges are not subsequently reversed to income even if circumstances later suggest that increased carrying amounts are recoverable. Inventory consisted of finished goods at December 31, 2013 and 2012.

Property, plant and equipment — Property, plant and equipment are recorded at cost, including the cost of improvements. Maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Depreciation is recorded on the straight-line method based on the estimated useful lives of the assets as follows:

Machinery (years)		5
Furniture, fixtures and equipment (years)		5
Computers and software (years)	3	—	5
Equipment acquired under capital leases (years)	3	—	5
Trucks (years)		3
Leasehold improvements	The shorter of the estimated life or the lease term
Solar energy facilities (years)		20

Impairment of long-lived assets — Long-lived assets, such as property, plant and equipment and intangible assets other than goodwill, are reviewed for impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of assets to be held and used is measured by a comparison of the carrying amount of an asset to estimated undiscounted future cash flows expected to be generated by the asset. If the carrying amount of an asset exceeds its estimated undiscounted future cash flows, an impairment charge is recognized by the amount by which the carrying value of the asset exceeds the fair value of the asset. Assets to be disposed of are separately presented in the balance sheet and reported at the lower of the carrying value or fair value less costs to sell, and are no longer depreciated.

Intangible assets other than goodwill — Intangible assets consist of patents and customer relationships. Amortization is recorded on the straight-line method based on the estimated useful lives of the assets.

Revenue recognition

Product sales — Revenue on product sales is recognized when there is evidence of an arrangement, title and risk of ownership have passed (generally upon delivery), the price to the buyer is fixed or determinable and collectability is reasonably assured. The Company makes determination of our customer’s credit worthiness at the time it accepts their initial order. For cable, wire and mechanical assembly sales, there are no formal customer acceptance requirements or further obligations related to our assembly services once the Company ships its products. Customers do not have a general right of return on products shipped therefore the Company makes no provisions for returns.

Construction contracts — Revenue on photovoltaic system construction contracts is generally recognized using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, unless we cannot make reasonably dependable estimates of the costs to complete the contract or the contact value is not fixed, in which case we would use the completed contract method. At the end of each period, the Company measures the cost incurred on each project and compares the result against its estimated total costs at completion. The percent of cost incurred determines the amount of revenue to be recognized. Payment terms are generally defined by the contract and as a result may not match the timing of the costs incurred by the Company and the related recognition of revenue. Such differences are recorded as costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts (an asset account) or billings in excess of costs and estimated earnings on uncompleted contracts (a liability account). For the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, nil and $10.8 million of progress payments have been netted against contracts costs disclosed in the account costs and estimated earnings in excess of billings on uncompleted contracts. The Company determines its customer’s credit worthiness at the time the order is accepted. Sudden and unexpected changes in customer’s financial condition could put recoverability at risk.

The percentage-of-completion method requires the use of various estimates, including, among others, the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. Contract revenues and contract costs to be recognized are dependent on the accuracy of estimates, including direct material and labor costs and those indirect costs related to contract performance, such as indirect labor, supplies, tools, repairs, and depreciation costs. The Company has a history of making reasonable estimates of the extent of progress towards completion, contract revenues and contract completion costs. However, due to uncertainties inherent in the estimation process, it is possible that actual contract revenues and completion costs may vary from estimates. Under the completed-contract method, contract costs are recorded to a construction in progress account and cash received are recorded to a liability account during the periods of construction. All revenues, costs, and profits are recognized in operations upon completion of the contract. A contract is considered complete and revenue recognized when all costs except insignificant items have been incurred and final acceptance has been received from the customer and receivables are deemed to be collectible. Provisions for estimated losses on uncompleted contracts, if any, are recognized in the period in which the loss first becomes probable and reasonably estimable.

For those projects where the Company is considered to be the owner, the project is accounted for under the rules of real estate accounting. In the event of a sale, the method of revenue recognition is determined by considering the extent of the buyer’s initial and continuing investment and the nature and the extent of the Company’s continuing involvement. Generally, revenue is recognized at the time of title transfer if the buyer’s investment is sufficient to demonstrate a commitment to pay for the property and the Company does not have a substantial continuing involvement with the property. When continuing involvement is substantial and not temporary, the Company applies the financing method, whereby the asset remains on the balance sheet and the proceeds received are recorded as a financing obligation. When a sale is not recognized due to continuing involvement and the financing method is applied, the Company records revenue and expenses related to the underlying operations of the asset in the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements.

For any arrangements containing multiple deliverables, the Company analyzes each activity within the sales arrangement to ensure that it adheres to the separation guidelines for multiple-element arrangements.  The Company allocates revenue for any transactions involving multiple elements to each unit of accounting based on its best estimate of the selling price, and recognize revenue for each unit of accounting when the revenue recognition criteria have been met.

Construction in Progress — During 2012, the Company entered into EPC arrangements to develop utility-scale SEF’s across Greece and Italy. The Company applied the completed contract method to these arrangements and capitalized all costs related to these projects at December 31, 2012. During the three months ended December 31, 2012, the Company recorded a $2.7 million provision for losses on contracts to costs incurred on the Greek projects that exceeded the discounted present value of the contract, reducing the balance of construction in progress for the Greek projects to $14.7 million as of December 31, 2012. The Greek project was substantially complete at December 31, 2012; however, final acceptance had not yet been received. The project in Italy was still in progress at December 31, 2012 and had a construction in progress balance of $1.4 million. The Company sold the Italy project to a third party buyer in the first quarter of 2013 and revenue of $1.8 million was recognized. During the quarter ended September 30, 2013 the EPC project in Greece met the completion criteria and revenue of $13.9 million was recognized. Construction in progress was none and $16.1 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Accounts receivable — The Company grants open credit terms to credit-worthy customers. Terms vary per contract terms and range from 30 to 365 days. Contractually, the Company may charge interest for extended payment terms and require collateral.

Allowance for doubtful accounts — The Company regularly monitors and assesses the risk of not collecting amounts owed by customers. This evaluation is based upon a variety of factors, including an analysis of amounts current and past due along with relevant history and facts particular to the customer. It requires the Company to make significant estimates, and changes in facts and circumstances could result in material changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts. Changes in allowance for doubtful accounts are as follows (in thousands):

	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Beginning balance	$	393		$	115
Provision for doubtful accounts		9,303			375
Write-offs		(3,809	)		(97	)
	$	5,887		$	393

Related Party Transactions — Products are bought from and sold to related parties at negotiated arms-length prices between the two parties.

Shipping and handling cost — Shipping and handling costs related to the delivery of finished goods are included in cost of goods sold. During the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, shipping and handling costs recorded in cost of goods sold were $0.1 million and $0.6 million, respectively.

Advertising costs — Costs for newspaper, television, radio, and other media and design are expensed as incurred. The Company expenses the production costs of advertising the first time the advertising takes place. The costs for this type of advertising were $0.1 million and $0.1 million during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Stock-based compensation — The Company measures the stock-based compensation costs of share-based compensation arrangements based on the grant-date fair value and generally recognizes the costs in the financial statements over the employee requisite service period. For further details, see Note 13 — Stock-based compensation.

Product warranties — The Company offers the industry standard of 25 year product warranty for our solar modules and industry standard five years on inverter and balance of system components. Due to the warranty periods, the Company bears the risk of extensive warranty claims long after the Company has shipped product and recognized revenue. In our cable, wire and mechanical assemblies business, historically our warranty claims have not been material. In our solar photovoltaic business, our greatest warranty exposure is in the form of product replacement. Until the third quarter of 2007, the Company purchased its solar panels from third-party suppliers and since the third-party warranties are consistent with industry standards the Company considers its financial exposure to warranty claims immaterial. Certain photovoltaic construction contracts entered into during the year ended December 31, 2007 included provisions under which the Company agreed to provide warranties to the buyer, and during the quarter ended September 30, 2007 and continuing through the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company installed its own manufactured solar panels. As a result, the Company recorded the provision for estimated warranty exposure on these contracts within cost of sales. Since the Company does not have sufficient historical data to estimate its exposure, it looked to its own historical data in combination with historical data reported by other solar system installers and manufacturers. The Company now only installs panels manufactured by unrelated third parties and its parent, LDK. The Company provides LDK’s pass through warranty, and reserve for unreimbursed costs, such as labor, material and transportation costs to replace panels and balance of system components provided by third-party manufacturers. Because we have largely used solar panels purchased from LDK for past projects and will continue to purchase solar panels from LDK, we may be exposed to increased risk that LDK may not perform under its warranties due to LDK’s liquidation and in the event LDK becomes insolvent.

Income taxes — The Company accounts for income taxes under the asset and liability method. Under this method, deferred tax assets and liabilities are determined based on differences between financial reporting and tax reporting bases of assets and liabilities and are measured using enacted tax rates and laws that are expected to be in effect when the differences are expected to reverse. Realization of deferred tax assets is dependent upon future taxable income. A valuation allowance is recognized if it is more likely than not that some portion, or all of a deferred tax asset will not be realized based on the weight of available evidence, including expected future earnings.

The Company recognizes the benefit of uncertain tax positions in its financial statements when it concludes that a tax position is more likely than not to be sustained upon examination based solely on its technical merits. Only after a tax position passes the first step of recognition will measurement be required. Under the measurement step, the tax benefit is measured as the largest amount of benefit that is more likely than not to be realized upon effective settlement. This is determined on a cumulative probability basis.

The Company elects to accrue any interest or penalties related to its uncertain tax positions as part of its income tax expense.

Foreign Currency — The Consolidated Financial Statements are presented in our reporting currency, U.S. dollars. The functional currency for the subsidiaries in Italy is the Euro. The functional currency for the subsidiaries in The People’s Republic of China is the Renminbi. Accordingly, balance sheets of the foreign subsidiaries are translated into U.S. dollars using the exchange rate in effect at the balance sheet date. Revenues and expenses are translated using the average exchange rates in effect during the period. Translation differences are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive (loss) income as foreign currency translation. Gains or losses on transactions denominated in a currency other than the subsidiaries’ functional currency which arises as a result of changes in foreign exchange rates are recorded as foreign exchange gain or loss in the statements of operations.

Post-retirement and post-employment benefits — The Company’s subsidiaries which are located in the People’s Republic of China and Italy contribute to a state pension scheme on behalf of its employees. The Company recorded $0.1million and $0.6 million in expense related to its pension contributions for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. Neither the Company nor its subsidiaries provide any other post-retirement or post-employment benefits.

XML

Note 12 - Stockholders' Equity (Details) - Warrant Activity (USD $)	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012	Dec. 31, 2011
Class of Warrant or Right [Line Items]
Outstanding, Shares	5,836,500	5,171,500
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share	$ 0.45	$ 0.56
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term	3 years 332 days
Exercisable December 31, 2013	1,435,500
Exercisable December 31, 2013	$ 0.46
Exercisable December 31, 2013	2 years 94 days
Issued, Shares	4,450,000	2,620,000
Issued, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share	$ 0.06	$ 0.33
Issued, Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term	3 years 332 days
Cacelled/expired, Shares	0	0
Outstanding, Shares	7,114,250	5,836,500
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share	$ 0.20	$ 0.45
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term	3 years 332 days
Warrant [Member]
Class of Warrant or Right [Line Items]
Outstanding, Shares	300,000		2,066,302
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share	$ 0.75		$ 2.91
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term	1 year 36 days	2 years 36 days	332 days
Exercisable December 31, 2013	300,000
Exercisable December 31, 2013	$ 0.75
Exercisable December 31, 2013	1 year 36 days
Issued, Shares		300,000
Issued, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		$ 0.75
Issued, Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term		3 years
Cacelled/expired, Shares		(2,066,302)
Cacelled/expired, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		$ 2.91
Outstanding, Shares	300,000	300,000
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share	$ 0.75	$ 0.75
Outstanding, Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term	1 year 36 days	2 years 36 days	332 days

XML

Note 14 - Income Taxes (Details) - The Provision (Benefit) for Income Taxes (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2013	Dec. 31, 2012
Current:
Federal		$ (46)
State	7	(21)
Foreign	979	(395)
Total current	986	(462)
Deferred:
Foreign	(173)	382
Total deferred	(173)	382
Total provision(benefit) for income taxes	$ 813	$ (80)

XML

Note 20 - Subsequent Events

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Subsequent Events [Abstract]

Subsequent Events [Text Block]

20.          Subsequent Events

In February 2014, LDK filed an application for provisional liquidation in the Cayman Islands in connection with its plans to resolve its offshore liquidity issues.

In March 2014, the Company received a formal notice of default and demand under the loan documents and forbearance agreement from Cathay Bank which requires the Company to repay the aggregate outstanding principal balance of the loan and unpaid interest.

XML

Note 16 - Commitments and Contingencies (Details) - The Accrual for Warranty Claims (USD $) In Thousands, unless otherwise specified	12 Months Ended
	Dec. 31, 2012		Dec. 31, 2013
The Accrual for Warranty Claims [Abstract]
Beginning balance - January 1	$ 1,679		$ 1,537
Provision charged to warranty expense	221
Less: warranty claims	(363)
Ending balance - December 31,	1,537		1,537
Current portion of warranty liability	200	[1]	200	[1]
Non-current portion of warranty liability	$ 1,337		$ 1,337

[1] The noncurrent portion of the product warranty liability is recorded in other liabilities.

XML

Note 16 - Commitments and Contingencies (Tables)

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

Schedule of Product Warranty Liability [Table Text Block]

	2013		2012
Beginning balance - January 1	$	1,537	$	1,679
Provision charged to warranty expense		-		221
Less: warranty claims		-		(363	)
Ending balance - December 31,		1,537		1,537
Current portion of warranty liability		200		200
Non-current portion of warranty liability	$	1,337	$	1,337

Schedule of Future Minimum Rental Payments for Operating Leases [Table Text Block]

2014	$	171
2015		176
2016		182
2017		17
Thereafter		-
	$	546

XML

Note 13 - Stock-based Compensation

12 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2013

Disclosure of Compensation Related Costs, Share-based Payments [Abstract]

Disclosure of Compensation Related Costs, Share-based Payments [Text Block]

13.          Stock-based Compensation

The Company measures stock-based compensation expense for all stock-based compensation awards based on the grant-date fair value and recognizes the cost in the financial statements over the employee requisite service period.

The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation expense, by type of awards for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
Employee stock options	$	575	$	349
Restricted stock grants		-		106
Total stock-based compensation expense	$	575	$	455

The following table summarizes the consolidated stock-based compensation by line items for the years ended December 31 (in thousands):

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013		December 31, 2012
General and administrative	$	429	$	394
Sales, marketing and customer service		100		57
Engineering, design and product management		46		4
Total stock-based compensation expense		575		455
Tax effect on stock-based compensation expense		—		—
Total stock-based compensation expense after income taxes	$	575	$	455

As stock-based compensation expense recognized in the consolidated statements of operations is based on awards ultimately expected to vest, it has been reduced for estimated forfeitures. Forfeitures are required to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.

Determining Fair Value

Valuation and Amortization Method — The Company estimates the fair value of service-based and performance-based stock options granted using the Black-Scholes option-pricing formula. The fair value is then amortized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service periods of the awards, which is generally the vesting period. In the case of performance-based stock options, amortization does not begin until it is determined that meeting the performance criteria is probable. Service-based and performance-based options typically have a five year life from date of grant and vesting periods of three to four years.

Expected Term — The Company’s expected term represents the period that the Company’s stock-based awards are expected to be outstanding. For awards granted subject only to service vesting requirements, the Company utilizes the simplified method for estimating the expected term of the stock-based award, instead of historical exercise data. For its performance-based awards, the Company has determined the expected term life to be five years based on contractual life and the seniority of the recipient.

Expected Volatility —The Company uses historical volatility of the price of its common shares to calculate the volatility for its granted options.

Expected Dividend — The Company has never paid dividends on its common shares and currently does not intend to do so, and accordingly, the dividend yield percentage is zero for all periods.

Risk-Free Interest Rate — The Company bases the risk-free interest rate used in the Black-Scholes valuation model upon the implied yield curve currently available on U.S. Treasury zero-coupon issues with a remaining term equal to the expected term used as the assumption in the model.

Assumptions used in the determination of the fair value of share-based payment awards using the Black-Scholes model for stock option grants during the years ended December 31 were as follows:

	For the Years Ended
	December 31, 2013			December 31, 2012
Expected term		3.75			3.75
Risk-free interest rate	0.95%	-	1.2%	0.6%	-	0.89%
Expected volatility	106%	-	118%	101	-	103%
Expected dividend yield		0%			0%

Equity Incentive Plan

On November 15, 2006, subject to approval of the stockholders, the Company adopted the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) which permits the Company to grant stock options to directors, officers or employees of the Company or others to purchase shares of common stock of the Company through awards of incentive and nonqualified stock options (“Option”), stock (“Restricted Stock” or “Unrestricted Stock”) and stock appreciation rights (“SARs”). The Plan was approved by the stockholders on February 7, 2007.

The Company currently has time-based options outstanding. The time-based options generally vest 25% annually and expire three to five years from the date of grant. The restricted shares were fully vested as of December 31, 2013. Total number of shares reserved and available for grant and issuance pursuant to this Plan is equal to 9% of the number of outstanding shares of the Company. Not more than 2,000,000 shares of stock shall be granted in the form of incentive stock options. Shares issued under the Plan will be drawn from authorized and unissued shares or shares now held or subsequently acquired by the Company. Outstanding shares of the Company shall, for purposes of such calculation, include the number of shares of stock into which other securities or instruments issued by the Company are currently convertible (e.g., convertible preferred stock, convertible debentures, or warrants for common stock), but not outstanding options to acquire stock. At December 31, 2013 there were 10,370,106 shares available for grant under the plan (9% of the outstanding shares of 198,214,456 plus outstanding warrants of 300,000 less options outstanding and exercises since inception).

The exercise price of any Option will be determined by the Company when the Option is granted and may not be less than 100% of the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant, and the exercise price of any incentive stock option granted to a stockholder with a 10% or greater shareholding will not be less than 110% of the fair market value of the shares on the date of grant. The exercise price per share of a SAR will be determined by the Company at the time of grant, but will in no event be less than the fair market value of a share of Company’s stock on the date of grant.

The following table summarizes the Company’s stock option activities:

	Shares			Weighted- Average Exercise Price Per Share		Weighted- Average Remaining Contractual Term		Aggregate Intrinsic Value ($000)
Outstanding as of January 1, 2012		5,171,500		$	0.56
Granted		2,620,000			0.33
Exercised		—			—
Forfeited		(1,955,000	)		0.57
Outstanding as of December 31, 2012		5,836,500		$	0.45
Granted		4,450,000			0.06
Exercised		—			—
Forfeited		(3,172,250	)		0.47
Outstanding as of December 31, 2013		7,114,250		$	0.20		3.91	$	-
Vested and exercisable as of December 31, 2013		1,435,500		$	0.46		2.26	$	-
Vested and expected to vest as of December 31, 2013		7,114,250		$	0.20		3.91	$	-

The following table presents the exercise price and remaining life information about options exercisable at December 31, 2013:

Range of exercise price			Shares Exercisable		Weighted average remaining contractual life		Weighted average exercise price		Aggregate Intrinsic (000s)
$1.24	-	$1.30		150,000		1.00	$	1.25	$	-
$0.70	-	$1.23		27,000		0.24		0.74		-
$0.23	-	$0.69		1,258,500		2.53		0.36		-
				1,435,500		2.26	$	0.46	$	-

Changes in the Company’s non-vested stock awards are summarized as follows:

	Time-based Options					Restricted Stock
	Shares			Weighted Average Exercise Price Per Share		Shares			Weighted Average Grant Date Fair Value Per Share
Non-vested as of January 1, 2012		4,325,000		$	0.41		-		$	-
Granted		2,620,000			0.33		400,000			0.27
Vested		(1,187,875	)		0.51		(400,000	)		0.27
Forfeited		(1,530,125	)		0.47		-			-
Non-vested as of December 31, 2012		4,227,000		$	0.38		-			-
Granted		4,450,000			0.06		-			-
Vested		(802,750	)		0.41		-			-
Forfeited		(2,195,500	)		0.64		-			-
Non-vested as of December 31, 2013		5,678,750		$	0.13		-		$	-

As of December 31, 2013, there was $0.6 million of unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested option awards, which is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average of 3.2 years.

The total intrinsic value of shares vested during the year ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 was $0.7 million and $0.5 million, respectively. There were no changes to the contractual life of any fully vested options during the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012. There were no options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2013 or 2012.

Following is a summary of our restricted stock awards as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and changes during the years then ended:

	Number of Shares		Weighted Average Grant-Date Fair Value
Restricted stock units at January 1, 2012		925,868	$	0.79
Granted		400,000		0.27
Forfeited		-		-
Restricted stock units at December 31, 2012		1,325,868		0.63
Granted		-		-
Forfeited		-		-
Restricted stock units at December 31, 2013		1,325,868	$	0.63