Note 1 — Basis for Presentation

Cubic Corporation (“we”, “us”, and “Cubic”) has prepared the accompanying unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Article 10 of Regulation S-X. Accordingly, they do not include all information and footnotes required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States for complete financial statements.

In our opinion, all adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of these financial statements have been included, and are of a normal and recurring nature, with the exceptions discussed within the Audit Committee Investigation and Correction of Immaterial Errors subsections below, considered necessary to fairly state the financial position of Cubic Corporation at June 30, 2015 and September 30, 2014; the results of its operations for the three- and nine-month periods ended June 30, 2015 and 2014; and its cash flows for the three- and nine-month periods ended June 30, 2015 and 2014. Operating results for the three- and nine-month periods ended June 30, 2015 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending September 30, 2015. For further information, refer to the consolidated financial statements and footnotes thereto included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2014.

In February 2015, we implemented a plan to restructure our defense services and defense systems businesses into a single business called Cubic Global Defense (CGD) to better align our defense business organizational structure with customer requirements, increase operational efficiencies and improve collaboration and innovation across the company. After this restructuring there is now a single, combined management structure for our legacy Cubic Defense Systems (CDS) and legacy Mission Support Services (MSS) segments. However, for segment financial reporting purposes, we continue to report the financial results of our defense systems and defense services segments separately. These two reporting segments have been renamed Cubic Global Defense Systems (CGD Systems) and Cubic Global Defense Services (CGD Services), respectively. There have been no significant changes in the operations that are included in each of these reporting segments as a result of the restructuring.

The preparation of the financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

Audit Committee Investigation

Our Audit Committee has conducted an investigation with the assistance of Latham & Watkins LLP and Deloitte FAS LLP to review our controls and procedures in connection with programs that are accounted for under the percentage of completion method. Through the application of the Company’s internal controls, management identified an issue which led to the investigation. As a result of the investigation, the Audit Committee and management of the Company have together determined that as of September 30, 2014, the total estimated costs of certain of our CGD Systems segment contracts were inappropriately reduced during its accounting close for the year ended September 30, 2014. The inappropriate reduction of the estimated costs to complete these contracts resulted in the overstatement of CGD Systems sales and operating income by approximately $750,000 for the quarter and year ended September 30, 2014.

Correction of Immaterial Errors

During the accounting close for our March 31, 2015 financial statements, we identified certain errors, unrelated to the matters described in the paragraph above, in our September 30, 2014 financial statements. These errors included an overstatement of revenue recognition on one contract and the understatement of cost of sales on a small number of contracts. The cumulative impact of these errors resulted in an overstatement of the Company’s operating income for the year ended September 30, 2014 of $1.6 million.

The cumulative amount of the errors described in the two paragraphs above overstated the Company’s operating income for fiscal 2014 by $2.4 million and understated the Company’s operating income for 2013 and prior years, cumulatively, by $0.3 million. The impact of correcting the above mentioned errors in the quarter ended December 31, 2014 understated operating income for the quarter by $2.1 million. The impact of correcting these errors (overstated) understated the following amounts in the quarter ended December 31, 2014 (in thousands):

	Audit Committee
	Investigation
	Error		Other Errors			Total Errors

Net sales:
Products	$	747	$	517		$	1,264

Costs and expenses:
Products	—		138			138
Services	—		438			438
Selling, general and administrative	—		(1,385		)	(1,385		)

	—		(809		)	(809		)


Operating income	747		1,326			2,073

Income before income taxes	747		1,326			2,073

Income taxes	299		490			789


Net income attributable to Cubic	$	448	$	836		$	1,284

Based on a qualitative and quantitative analysis of these errors, management concluded that all such errors are cumulatively and individually considered immaterial to the 2014 financial statements and are immaterial to the expected full year results for 2015 and had no effect on the trend of financial results. As such, these errors have been corrected in the financial statements for the quarter ended December 31, 2014.

Interim Goodwill Impairment Test

Goodwill represents the purchase price paid in excess of the fair value of net tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized but is subject to an impairment test on an annual basis and when circumstances indicate that an impairment is more likely than not. Such circumstances include a significant adverse change in the business climate for one of our reporting units or a decision to dispose of a reporting unit or a significant portion of a reporting unit.

In the second quarter of fiscal 2015, we learned that our CGD Services business had not won two contracts for new work on which it had submitted proposals. Consequently, in the second quarter our Defense Services business lowered its internal profitability projections. As such, in the second quarter of fiscal 2015 we believed that it was appropriate to perform an interim goodwill impairment test for our Defense Services reporting unit.

The test for goodwill impairment is a two-step process. The first step of the test is performed by comparing the fair value of each reporting unit to its carrying value, including recorded goodwill. If the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its fair value, the second step is performed to measure the amount of the impairment, if any, by comparing the implied fair value of goodwill to its carrying value. Any resulting impairment determined would be recorded in the current period.

Determining the fair value of a reporting unit for purposes of the goodwill impairment test is judgmental in nature and involves the use of estimates and assumptions. These estimates and assumptions could have a significant impact on whether or not an impairment charge is recognized and also the magnitude of any such charge. Estimates of fair value are primarily determined using discounted cash flows and market multiples from publicly traded comparable companies. These approaches use significant estimates and assumptions including projected future cash flows, discount rate reflecting the inherent risk in future cash flows, perpetual growth rate and determination of appropriate market comparables. Based upon the results of the first step of the impairment analysis that we performed, the estimated fair value for our Defense Services reporting unit exceeded its carrying value. As such, no impairment of goodwill was recorded in connection with our interim impairment test performed in the second quarter of fiscal 2015. In the third quarter of fiscal 2015, no interim goodwill impairment test was deemed necessary.

Unforeseen negative changes in future business or other market conditions for any of our reporting units including margin compression or loss of business, could cause recorded goodwill to be impaired in the future. Also, changes in estimates and assumptions we make in conducting our goodwill assessment could affect the estimated fair value of our reporting units and could result in a goodwill impairment charge in a future period.

Significant Accounting Policies

There have been no material changes to our significant accounting policies as compared with the significant accounting policies described in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2014.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. ASU 2014-09 outlines a comprehensive revenue recognition model and supersedes most current revenue recognition guidance and will require revenue to be recognized when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Adoption of the new rules could affect the timing of revenue recognition for certain transactions. ASU 2014-09 will be effective for us starting in the first quarter of fiscal 2019 or we may adopt ASU 2014-09 early in the first quarter of 2018. ASU 2014-09 allows for two methods of adoption: (a) “full retrospective” adoption, meaning the standard is applied to all periods presented, or (b) “modified retrospective” adoption, meaning the cumulative effect of applying ASU 2014-09 is recognized as an adjustment to the opening retained earnings balance in the year of adoption. We have not yet determined which method of adoption we will select or if we will choose to adopt the standard early. As the new standard will supersede substantially all existing revenue guidance affecting us under GAAP, it could impact revenue and cost recognition on a significant number of contracts across our business segments, in addition to our business processes and our information technology systems. As a result, our evaluation of the effect of the new standard will likely extend over several future periods.

In August 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements - Going Concern, which requires management to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and provide related footnote disclosures. The guidance is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2016. ASU 2014-15 will be effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2016. Early adoption is permitted for financial statements that have not been previously issued. This adoption is not expected to have a significant impact on our financial statements.

In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis. The new standard modifies current guidance on consolidation under the variable interest model and the voting model. ASU 2015-02 will be effective for the Company beginning in the first quarter of fiscal 2016. We are currently evaluating the impact of ASU 2015-02 on our financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-05, Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement. ASU 2015-05 provides guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. ASU 2015-05 will be effective for the Company beginning on October 1, 2016, with early adoption permitted. We are currently assessing the impact that adopting this new accounting guidance will have on our consolidated financial statements.

In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-03, Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs which requires that all costs incurred to issue debt be presented in the balance sheet as a direct reduction from the carrying value of the debt, similar to the presentation of debt discounts. ASU 2015-03 is effective for us on October 1, 2016 with early adoption permitted. We do not expect that the adoption of this new accounting guidance will have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements.