During the normal course of business, we enter into commercial commitments in the form of letters of credit, bank guarantees, and surety bonds to provide financial and performance assurance to third parties. Our amended and restated Revolving Credit Facility provides us with a sub-limit of $400.0 million to issue letters of credit, subject to certain additional limits depending on the currencies of the letters of credit, at a fee based on the applicable margin for Eurocurrency revolving loans and a fronting fee. As of December 31, 2019, we had $39.3 million in letters of credit issued under our Revolving Credit Facility, leaving $360.7 million of availability for the issuance of additional letters of credit. As of December 31, 2019, we also had $9.8 million of letters of credit under separate agreements that were posted by certain of our foreign subsidiaries and $156.9 million of letters of credit issued under three bilateral facilities, of which $31.8 million was secured with cash, leaving $608.5 million of aggregate available capacity under such agreements and facilities. We also had $89.8 million of surety bonds outstanding, leaving $626.4 million of available bonding capacity under our surety lines as of December 31, 2019. The majority of these letters of credit and surety bonds supported our systems projects.

We purchase raw materials, manufacturing equipment, and various services from a variety of vendors. During the normal course of business, in order to manage manufacturing lead times and help ensure an adequate supply of certain items, we enter into agreements with suppliers that either allow us to procure goods and services when we choose or that establish purchase requirements over the term of the agreement. In certain instances, our purchase agreements allow us to cancel, reschedule, or adjust our purchase requirements based on our business needs prior to firm orders being placed. Consequently, only a portion of our purchase commitments are firm and noncancelable or cancelable with a significant penalty. As of December 31, 2019, our obligations under such arrangements were $1.4 billion, of which $0.4 billion related to capital expenditures. We expect to make $0.9 billion of payments under these purchase obligations in 2020.

When we recognize revenue for module or system sales, we accrue liabilities for the estimated future costs of meeting our limited warranty obligations for both modules and the balance of the systems. We make and revise these estimates based primarily on the number of solar modules under warranty installed at customer locations, our historical experience with and projections of warranty claims, and our estimated per-module replacement costs. We also monitor our expected future module performance through certain quality and reliability testing and actual performance in certain field installation sites. From time to time, we have taken remediation actions with respect to affected modules beyond our limited warranties and may elect to do so in the future, in which case we would incur additional expenses. Such potential voluntary future remediation actions beyond our limited warranty obligations may be material to our consolidated statements of operations if we commit to any such remediation actions.



	2019			2018			2017
Product warranty liability, beginning of period	$	220,692		$	224,274		$	252,408
Accruals for new warranties issued	17,327			14,132			23,313
Settlements	(22,540		)	(11,851		)	(11,329		)
Changes in estimate of product warranty liability	(85,682		)	(5,863		)	(40,118		)
Product warranty liability, end of period	$	129,797		$	220,692		$	224,274
Current portion of warranty liability	$	20,291		$	27,657		$	28,767
Noncurrent portion of warranty liability	$	109,506		$	193,035		$	195,507

We estimate our limited product warranty liability for power output and defects in materials and workmanship under normal use and service conditions based on return rates for each series of module technology. During the year ended December 31, 2019, we revised this estimate downward based on updated information regarding our warranty claims, which reduced our product warranty liability by $80.0 million. This updated information reflected lower-than-expected return rates for our newer series of module technology, the evolving claims profile of each series, and certain changes to our warranty programs. During the year ended December 31, 2017, we reduced our product warranty liability by $31.3 million as a result of a reduction in the estimated replacement cost of our modules under warranty. Such change in estimate was primarily driven by continued reductions in the manufacturing cost per watt of our solar modules.

In general, we expect the return rates for our newer series of module technology to be lower than our older series. We estimate that the return rate for such newer series of module technology will be less than 1%. As of December 31, 2019, a 1% increase in the return rate across all series of module technology would increase our product warranty liability by $89.8 million, and a 1% increase in the return rate for BoS parts would not have a material impact on the associated warranty liability.

As part of our systems business, we conduct performance testing of a system prior to substantial completion to confirm the system meets its operational and capacity expectations noted in the EPC agreement. In addition, we may provide an energy performance test during the first or second year of a system’s operation to demonstrate that the actual energy generation for the applicable period meets or exceeds the modeled energy expectation, after certain adjustments. If there is an underperformance event with regards to these tests, we may incur liquidated damages as specified in the EPC agreement. In certain instances, a bonus payment may be received at the end of the applicable test period if the system performs above a specified level. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, we accrued $4.6 million and $0.4 million, respectively, for our estimated obligations under such arrangements, which were classified as “Other current liabilities” in our consolidated balance sheets.

As part of our O&M service offerings, we typically offer an effective availability guarantee, which stipulates that a system will be available to generate a certain percentage of total possible energy during a specific period after adjusting for factors outside our control as the service provider, such as weather, curtailment, outages, force majeure, and other conditions that may affect system availability. Effective availability guarantees are only offered as part of our O&M services and terminate at the end of an O&M arrangement. If we fail to meet the contractual threshold for these guarantees, we may incur liquidated damages for certain lost energy. Our O&M agreements typically contain provisions limiting our total potential losses under an agreement, including amounts paid for liquidated damages, to a percentage of O&M fees. Many of our O&M agreements also contain provisions whereby we may receive a bonus payment if system availability exceeds a separate threshold. As of December 31, 2019, we accrued $0.6 million of liquidated damages under our effective availability guarantees, which were classified as “Other current liabilities” in our consolidated balance sheets.

In certain limited circumstances, we have provided indemnifications to customers, including project tax equity investors, under which we are contractually obligated to compensate such parties for losses they suffer resulting from a breach of a representation, warranty, or covenant or a reduction in tax benefits received, including investment tax credits. Project related tax benefits are, in part, based on guidance provided by the IRS and U.S. Treasury Department, which includes assumptions regarding the fair value of qualifying PV solar power systems. For any sales contracts that have such indemnification provisions, we initially recognize a liability under ASC 460 for the estimated premium that would be required by a guarantor to issue the same indemnity in a standalone arm’s-length transaction with an unrelated party. We typically base these estimates on the cost of insurance policies that cover the underlying risks being indemnified and may purchase such policies to mitigate our exposure to potential indemnification payments. We subsequently measure such liabilities at the greater of the initially estimated premium or the contingent liability required to be

After an indemnification liability is recorded, we derecognize such amount pursuant to ASC 460-10-35-2 depending on the nature of the indemnity, which derecognition typically occurs upon expiration or settlement of the arrangement, and any contingent aspects of the indemnity are accounted for in accordance with ASC 450. We accrued $0.8 million of current indemnification liabilities as of December 31, 2019. We also accrued $4.2 million and $3.0 million of noncurrent indemnification liabilities, respectively, as of December 31, 2019 and 2018. As of December 31, 2019, the maximum potential amount of future payments under our tax related and other indemnifications was $152.8 million, and we held insurance policies allowing us to recover up to $84.9 million of potential amounts paid under the indemnifications covered by the policies.

We may seek to make additions to our advanced-stage project pipeline by actively developing our early-to-mid-stage project pipeline and by pursuing opportunities to acquire projects at various stages of development. In connection with such project acquisitions, we may agree to pay additional amounts to project sellers upon the achievement of certain milestones, such as obtaining a PPA, obtaining financing, or selling the project to a new owner. We recognize a project acquisition contingent liability when we determine that such a liability is both probable and reasonably estimable, and the carrying amount of the related project asset is correspondingly increased. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, we accrued $2.4 million and $0.7 million of current liabilities, respectively, and $4.5 million and $2.3 million of long-term liabilities, respectively, for project related contingent obligations. Any future differences between the acquisition-date contingent obligation estimate and the ultimate settlement of the obligation are recognized as an adjustment to the project asset, as contingent payments are considered direct and incremental to the underlying value of the related project.

On March 15, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit titled Smilovits v. First Solar, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:12-cv-00555-DGC, was filed in the United States District Court for the District of Arizona against the Company and certain of our current and former directors and officers. The complaint was filed on behalf of persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s publicly traded securities between April 30, 2008 and February 28, 2012 (the “Class Action”). The complaint generally alleged that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 by making false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s financial performance and prospects. The action included claims for damages, including interest, and an award of reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees to the putative class.

On July 23, 2012, the Arizona District Court issued an order appointing as lead plaintiffs in the Class Action the Mineworkers’ Pension Scheme and British Coal Staff Superannuation Scheme (collectively, the “Pension Schemes”). The Pension Schemes filed an amended complaint on August 17, 2012, which contains similar allegations and seeks similar relief as the original complaint. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on September 14, 2012. On December 17, 2012, the court denied defendants’ motion to dismiss. On October 8, 2013, the Arizona District Court granted the Pension Schemes’ motion for class certification and certified a class comprised of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired publicly traded securities of the Company between April 30, 2008 and February 28, 2012 and were damaged thereby, excluding defendants and certain related parties. Merits discovery closed on February 27, 2015.

Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment on March 27, 2015. On August 11, 2015, the Arizona District Court granted defendants’ motion in part and denied it in part, and certified an issue for immediate appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals (the “Ninth Circuit”). First Solar filed a petition for interlocutory appeal with the Ninth Circuit, and that petition was granted on November 18, 2015. On May 20, 2016, the Pension Schemes moved to vacate the order granting the petition, dismiss the appeal, and stay the merits briefing schedule. On December 13, 2016, the Ninth Circuit

denied the Pension Schemes’ motion. On January 31, 2018, the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion affirming the Arizona District Court’s order denying in part defendants’ motion for summary judgment. On March 16, 2018, First Solar filed a petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc with the Ninth Circuit. On May 7, 2018, the Ninth Circuit denied defendants’ petition. On August 6, 2018, defendants filed a petition for writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. Meanwhile, in the Arizona District Court, expert discovery was completed on February 5, 2019. On June 24, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court denied the petition. Following the denial of the petition, the Arizona District Court ordered that the trial begin on January 7, 2020.

On January 5, 2020, First Solar entered into an MOU to settle the Class Action. First Solar agreed to pay a total of $350 million to settle the claims in the Class Action brought on behalf of all persons who purchased or otherwise acquired the Company’s shares between April 30, 2008 and February 28, 2012, in exchange for mutual releases and a dismissal with prejudice of the complaint upon court approval of the settlement. The proposed settlement contains no admission of liability, wrongdoing, or responsibility by any of the parties. As a result of the entry into the MOU, we accrued a loss for the above-referenced settlement in our results of operations for the year ended December 31, 2019. On February 13, 2020, First Solar entered into a stipulation of settlement with certain named plaintiffs on terms and conditions that are consistent with the MOU. On February 14, 2020, the lead plaintiffs filed a motion for preliminary approval of the settlement. The settlement is subject to approval by the Arizona District Court on a schedule to be determined by the court.

On June 23, 2015, a suit titled Maverick Fund, L.D.C. v. First Solar, Inc., et al., Case No. 2:15-cv-01156-ROS, was filed in Arizona District Court by putative stockholders that opted out of the Class Action. The complaint names the Company and certain of our current and former directors and officers as defendants, and alleges that the defendants violated Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and violated state law, by making false and misleading statements regarding the Company’s financial performance and prospects. The action includes claims for recessionary and actual damages, interest, punitive damages, and an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees, expert fees, and costs. The Company believes it has meritorious defenses and will vigorously defend this action.

First Solar and the individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on July 16, 2018. On November 27, 2018, the Court granted defendants’ motion to dismiss the plaintiffs’ negligent misrepresentation claim under state law, but otherwise denied defendants’ motion. The plaintiffs have argued that the action is unique from the Class Action and have sought additional discovery. Fact discovery is scheduled to be complete by June 5, 2020, and expert discovery is scheduled to be complete by October 23, 2020. As of December 31, 2019, we accrued $13 million of estimated losses for this action, which represents our best estimate of the lower bound of the costs to resolve this case. The ultimate amount of loss may be materially higher.

On July 16, 2013, a derivative complaint was filed in the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, titled Bargar, et al. v. Ahearn, et al., Case No. CV2013-009938, by a putative stockholder against certain current and former directors and officers of the Company (“Bargar”). The complaint generally alleges that the defendants caused or allowed false and misleading statements to be made concerning the Company’s financial performance and prospects. The action includes claims for, among other things, breach of fiduciary duties, insider trading, unjust enrichment, and waste of corporate assets. By court order on October 3, 2013, the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County granted the parties’ stipulation to defer defendants’ response to the complaint pending resolution of the Class Action or expiration of a stay issued in certain consolidated derivative actions in the Arizona District Court. On November 5, 2013, the matter was placed on the court’s inactive calendar. The parties have jointly sought and obtained multiple requests to continue the stay in this action. Most recently, on November 6, 2019, the court entered an order continuing the stay until March 31, 2020. On December 5, 2019, the court granted a motion by one of two named plaintiffs to voluntarily dismiss that plaintiff’s claims; one named plaintiff remains in the case.

The Company believes that the plaintiff in the Bargar derivative action lacks standing to pursue litigation on behalf of First Solar. The Bargar derivative action is still in the initial stages and there has been no discovery. Accordingly, at this time we are not in a position to assess the likelihood of any potential loss or adverse effect on our financial condition or to estimate the range of potential loss, if any.

We are party to other legal matters and claims in the normal course of our operations. While we believe the ultimate outcome of such other matters and claims will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows, the outcome of such matters and claims is not determinable with certainty, and negative outcomes may adversely affect us.