Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2013
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Contractual Obligation At December 31, 2013, the Company had purchase commitments due within one year totaling $17,355 for materials through contract manufacturing agreements at negotiated prices. The amounts purchased under these obligations totaled $8,586 in 2013. Indirect Tax Contingencies The Company accrues non income-tax liabilities for indirect tax matters when management believes that a loss is probable and the amounts can be reasonably estimated, while contingent gains are recognized only when realized. In the event any losses are sustained in excess of accruals, they are charged against income. In evaluating indirect tax matters, management takes into consideration factors such as historical experience with matters of similar nature, specific facts and circumstances, and the likelihood of prevailing. Management evaluates and updates accruals as matters progress over time. It is reasonably possible that some of the matters for which accruals have not been established could be decided unfavorably to the Company and could require recognizing future expenditures. Also, statutes of limitations could expire without the Company paying the taxes for matters for which accruals have been established which could result in the recognition of future gains upon reversal of these accruals at that time. At December 31, 2013, the Company was a party to several indirect tax claims from various taxing authorities globally that were incurred in the normal course of business, none of which individually or in the aggregate is considered material by management in relation to the Company’s financial position or results of operations. In management’s opinion, the consolidated financial statements would not be materially affected by the outcome of these indirect tax claims and/or proceedings or asserted claims. In addition to these routine indirect tax matters, the Company was a party to the proceeding described below: In August 2012, one of the Company's Brazilian subsidiaries was notified of a tax assessment of approximately $133,000, including penalties and interest, regarding certain Brazilian federal indirect taxes (Industrialized Products Tax, Import Tax, Programa de Integração Social and Contribution to Social Security Financing) for 2008 and 2009. The assessment alleges improper importation of certain components into the country's free trade zone that would nullify certain indirect tax incentives. On September 10, 2012, the Company filed its administrative defenses with the tax authorities. This proceeding is currently pending an administrative level decision, which could negatively impact Brazilian federal indirect taxes in other years that remain open under statute. It is reasonably possible that the Company could be required to pay taxes, penalties and interest related to this matter, which could be material to the Company's consolidated financial statements. Additionally, in May 2013, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requested that the Company retain certain documents and produce certain records relating to the assessment, and the Company is complying with that request. In response to an order by the administrative court, the tax inspector provided further analysis with respect to the tax inspector’s initial assessment in December 2013 that, if accepted by the administrative court, could indicate a potential exposure that is significantly lower than the initial tax assessment received in August 2012. However, this further analysis is not binding upon the administrative court and is subject to administrative court approval. Additionally, any decision by the administrative court is subject to automatic appeal. Accordingly, the Company cannot provide any assurance that its exposure pursuant to the initial assessment will be lowered significantly or at all. The Company has filed additional administrative defenses in response to the tax inspector’s further analysis At December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Company had an accrual of approximately $26,000 for certain indirect tax positions in both periods. A loss contingency is reasonably possible if it has a more than remote but less than probable chance of occurring. Although management believes the Company has valid defenses with respect to its indirect tax positions, it is reasonably possible that a loss could occur in excess of the estimated accrual, for which the Company estimated the aggregate risk at December 31, 2013 to be up to approximately $395,000 for its material indirect tax matters, which amounts includes the tax assessment discussed above. The aggregate risk related to indirect taxes will decrease on an annual basis as the applicable statutes of limitations expire. Legal Contingencies At December 31, 2013, the Company was a party to several lawsuits that were incurred in the normal course of business, none of which individually or in the aggregate is considered material by management in relation to the Company’s financial position or results of operations. In addition, the Company has indemnification obligations with certain former employees and costs associated with these indemnifications are expensed as incurred. In management’s opinion, the Company's consolidated financial statements would not be materially affected by the outcome of these legal proceedings, commitments or asserted claims. In addition to these routine legal proceedings, the Company was a party to the legal proceedings described below as of December 31, 2013: Securities Action On June 30, 2010, a shareholder filed a putative class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio alleging violations of the federal securities laws against the Company, certain current and former officers, and the Company's independent auditors (Louisiana Municipal Police Employees Retirement System v. KPMG et al., No. 10-CV-1461). The complaint sought unspecified compensatory damages on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the Company's stock between June 30, 2005 and January 15, 2008 and fees and expenses related to the lawsuit. The complaint generally relates to the matters set forth in the court documents filed by the SEC in June 2010 finalizing the settlement of civil charges stemming from the investigation of the Company conducted by the Division of Enforcement of the SEC. In the second quarter 2013, the Company recorded a $30,000 pre-tax charge within selling and administrative expense related to an agreement in principle to settle this matter and an offsetting $12,755 pre-tax credit within selling and administrative expense related to the Company's insurance recovery. On November 14, 2013, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the parties’ stipulated settlement agreement; however, the settlement was subject to notice to the putative class and final approval by the court. In the fourth quarter of 2013, the Company and insurance companies paid their respective settlement amounts into an escrow fund in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement. Global Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) Review During the second quarter of 2010, while conducting due diligence in connection with a potential acquisition in Russia, the Company identified certain transactions and payments by its subsidiary in Russia (primarily during 2005 to 2008) that potentially implicated the FCPA, particularly its books and records provisions. The Company conducted a global internal review and collected information related to its global FCPA compliance. In the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company identified certain transactions within its AP operation that occurred over the past several years that also potentially implicated the FCPA. The Company continues to monitor its ongoing global compliance with the FCPA. The Company voluntarily self-reported its findings to the SEC and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and cooperated with these agencies in their review. The Company was previously informed that the SEC's inquiry had been converted to a formal, non-public investigation. The Company reached an agreement with the DOJ and the SEC to the terms of a settlement of their inquiries, which terms were filed in federal court on October 22, 2013. These terms include combined payments to the U.S. government of $48,000 in disgorgement, penalties, and pre-judgment interest and the appointment of an independent compliance monitor for a minimum period of 18 months. The Company recorded a $28,000 pre-tax charge in the second quarter of 2013 within selling and administrative expense for additional estimated losses related to this matter. As of December 31, 2012, the accrual for estimated losses was $20,000. The Company remitted the combined payments to the U.S. government in November 2013.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Contractual Obligation

At December 31, 2013, the Company had purchase commitments due within one year totaling $17,355 for materials through contract manufacturing agreements at negotiated prices. The amounts purchased under these obligations totaled $8,586 in 2013.

Indirect Tax Contingencies

The Company accrues non income-tax liabilities for indirect tax matters when management believes that a loss is probable and the amounts can be reasonably estimated, while contingent gains are recognized only when realized. In the event any losses are sustained in excess of accruals, they are charged against income. In evaluating indirect tax matters, management takes into consideration factors such as historical experience with matters of similar nature, specific facts and circumstances, and the likelihood of prevailing. Management evaluates and updates accruals as matters progress over time. It is reasonably possible that some of the matters for which accruals have not been established could be decided unfavorably to the Company and could require recognizing future expenditures. Also, statutes of limitations could expire without the Company paying the taxes for matters for which accruals have been established which could result in the recognition of future gains upon reversal of these accruals at that time.

At December 31, 2013, the Company was a party to several indirect tax claims from various taxing authorities globally that were incurred in the normal course of business, none of which individually or in the aggregate is considered material by management in relation to the Company’s financial position or results of operations. In management’s opinion, the consolidated financial statements would not be materially affected by the outcome of these indirect tax claims and/or proceedings or asserted claims.

In addition to these routine indirect tax matters, the Company was a party to the proceeding described below:

In August 2012, one of the Company's Brazilian subsidiaries was notified of a tax assessment of approximately $133,000, including penalties and interest, regarding certain Brazilian federal indirect taxes (Industrialized Products Tax, Import Tax, Programa de Integração Social and Contribution to Social Security Financing) for 2008 and 2009. The assessment alleges improper importation of certain components into the country's free trade zone that would nullify certain indirect tax incentives. On September 10, 2012, the Company filed its administrative defenses with the tax authorities. This proceeding is currently pending an administrative level decision, which could negatively impact Brazilian federal indirect taxes in other years that remain open under statute. It is reasonably possible that the Company could be required to pay taxes, penalties and interest related to this matter, which could be material to the Company's consolidated financial statements. Additionally, in May 2013, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) requested that the Company retain certain documents and produce certain records relating to the assessment, and the Company is complying with that request.

In response to an order by the administrative court, the tax inspector provided further analysis with respect to the tax inspector’s initial assessment in December 2013 that, if accepted by the administrative court, could indicate a potential exposure that is significantly lower than the initial tax assessment received in August 2012. However, this further analysis is not binding upon the administrative court and is subject to administrative court approval. Additionally, any decision by the administrative court is subject to automatic appeal. Accordingly, the Company cannot provide any assurance that its exposure pursuant to the initial assessment will be lowered significantly or at all. The Company has filed additional administrative defenses in response to the tax inspector’s further analysis

At December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, the Company had an accrual of approximately $26,000 for certain indirect tax positions in both periods. A loss contingency is reasonably possible if it has a more than remote but less than probable chance of occurring. Although management believes the Company has valid defenses with respect to its indirect tax positions, it is reasonably possible that a loss could occur in excess of the estimated accrual, for which the Company estimated the aggregate risk at December 31, 2013 to be up to approximately $395,000 for its material indirect tax matters, which amounts includes the tax assessment discussed above. The aggregate risk related to indirect taxes will decrease on an annual basis as the applicable statutes of limitations expire.

Legal Contingencies

At December 31, 2013, the Company was a party to several lawsuits that were incurred in the normal course of business, none of which individually or in the aggregate is considered material by management in relation to the Company’s financial position or results of operations. In addition, the Company has indemnification obligations with certain former employees and costs associated with these indemnifications are expensed as incurred. In management’s opinion, the Company's consolidated financial statements would not be materially affected by the outcome of these legal proceedings, commitments or asserted claims. In addition to these routine legal proceedings, the Company was a party to the legal proceedings described below as of December 31, 2013:

Securities Action

On June 30, 2010, a shareholder filed a putative class action complaint in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio alleging violations of the federal securities laws against the Company, certain current and former officers, and the Company's independent auditors (Louisiana Municipal Police Employees Retirement System v. KPMG et al., No. 10-CV-1461). The complaint sought unspecified compensatory damages on behalf of a class of persons who purchased the Company's stock between June 30, 2005 and January 15, 2008 and fees and expenses related to the lawsuit. The complaint generally relates to the matters set forth in the court documents filed by the SEC in June 2010 finalizing the settlement of civil charges stemming from the investigation of the Company conducted by the Division of Enforcement of the SEC. In the second quarter 2013, the Company recorded a $30,000 pre-tax charge within selling and administrative expense related to an agreement in principle to settle this matter and an offsetting $12,755 pre-tax credit within selling and administrative expense related to the Company's insurance recovery. On November 14, 2013, the court entered an order preliminarily approving the parties’ stipulated settlement agreement; however, the settlement was subject to notice to the putative class and final approval by the court. In the fourth quarter of 2013, the Company and insurance companies paid their respective settlement amounts into an escrow fund in accordance with the terms of the settlement agreement.

Global Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) Review

During the second quarter of 2010, while conducting due diligence in connection with a potential acquisition in Russia, the Company identified certain transactions and payments by its subsidiary in Russia (primarily during 2005 to 2008) that potentially implicated the FCPA, particularly its books and records provisions. The Company conducted a global internal review and collected information related to its global FCPA compliance. In the fourth quarter of 2010, the Company identified certain transactions within its AP operation that occurred over the past several years that also potentially implicated the FCPA. The Company continues to monitor its ongoing global compliance with the FCPA.

The Company voluntarily self-reported its findings to the SEC and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and cooperated with these agencies in their review. The Company was previously informed that the SEC's inquiry had been converted to a formal, non-public investigation. The Company reached an agreement with the DOJ and the SEC to the terms of a settlement of their inquiries, which terms were filed in federal court on October 22, 2013. These terms include combined payments to the U.S. government of $48,000 in disgorgement, penalties, and pre-judgment interest and the appointment of an independent compliance monitor for a minimum period of 18 months. The Company recorded a $28,000 pre-tax charge in the second quarter of 2013 within selling and administrative expense for additional estimated losses related to this matter. As of December 31, 2012, the accrual for estimated losses was $20,000. The Company remitted the combined payments to the U.S. government in November 2013.