Other Commitments and Contingencies	9 Months Ended
Other Commitments and Contingencies	Oct. 02, 2015
Other Commitments and Contingencies	Other Commitments and Contingencies: VirnetX, Inc. In fiscal 2007, the Company transferred several patents to VirnetX Inc., a subsidiary of VirnetX Holding Corp. In consideration of this transfer, the Company received certain license rights and the right to receive a percentage of the consideration received in patent infringement or enforcement claims against third parties. In November 2012, a jury found that Apple Corporation infringed two of the patents that the Company previously transferred to VirnetX and awarded approximately $368 million to VirnetX, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated this award. Although VirnetX petitioned the appeals court for an en banc review, this request was denied and the case has been remanded to the Federal District Court for further proceedings. On December 17, 2014, VirnetX settled a separate patent infringement dispute with Microsoft Corporation, with those parties executing an Amended Settlement and License Agreement. This agreement amended and restated certain terms of the original Settlement and License Agreement, dated May 14, 2010, between VirnetX and Microsoft. Under the terms of the amended agreement, Microsoft agreed to pay $23 million to VirnetX to settle the patent dispute and expand Microsoft's license. Under its agreements with VirnetX, the Company has received proceeds in the second and third quarter of the current year from VirnetX in the amount of $10 million, $8 million of which was received during the third quarter ended October 2, 2015, from VirnetX's settlement with Microsoft and VirnetX's settlement of a previous litigation matter against various defendants, including Mitel, Siemens and Avaya. Pursuant to the agreements with VirnetX, the amount received by the Company includes reimbursement for attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the Company in connection with these litigation matters. In addition, the Company is required to pay a royalty on the proceeds received to the customer who paid for the development of the technology. The Company does not have any material assets or liabilities recorded in connection with this matter as of October 2, 2015. Government Investigations and Reviews The Company is routinely subject to investigations and reviews relating to compliance with various laws and regulations with respect to its role as a contractor to federal, state, and local government customers and in connection with performing services in countries outside of the United States. Adverse findings in these investigations or reviews can lead to criminal, civil or administrative proceedings, and the Company could face penalties, fines, compensatory damages, and suspension or debarment from doing business with governmental agencies. In addition, the Company could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against Leidos. Adverse findings could also have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, condensed consolidated financial position, results of operations, and cash flows due to its reliance on government contracts. U.S. Government agencies, including the Defense Contract Audit Agency ("DCAA"), Defense Contract Management Agency ("DCMA"), and others, routinely audit and review a contractor’s performance on government contracts, indirect rates and pricing practices, and compliance with applicable contracting and procurement laws, regulations, and standards. They also review the adequacy of the contractor’s compliance with government standards for its business systems, including: a contractor’s accounting system, earned value management system, estimating system, materials management and accounting system, property management system, and purchasing system. Both contractors and the U.S. Government agencies conducting these audits and reviews have come under increased scrutiny including such subjects as billing practices, labor charging, and accounting for unallowable costs. As a result, audits and reviews have become more rigorous and the standards to which the Company is held are being more strictly interpreted, increasing the likelihood of an audit or review resulting in an adverse outcome. During the course of its current audits, the DCAA is closely examining and questioning costs and several of the Company’s long established and disclosed practices, increasing the uncertainty as to the ultimate conclusion that will be reached. In addition, the Company also monitors compliance with these practices and has an obligation under its contracts to make disclosures of specific improprieties based on credible evidence. The Company changed its indirect rate structure used in its indirect cost system in fiscal 2011 and future years. The DCAA is performing reviews of these changes and the Company’s compliance with certain other U.S. Government Cost Accounting Standards. A finding of significant control deficiencies in the Company’s system audits or other reviews can result in cash payments, penalties and potentially decremented billing rates. The Company’s indirect cost audits by the DCAA remain open for fiscal 2011 and subsequent fiscal years. Although the Company has recorded contract revenues subsequent to and including fiscal 2011 based upon an estimate of costs that the Company believes will be approved upon final audit or review, the Company does not know the outcome of any ongoing or future audits or reviews and adjustments, and if future adjustments exceed the Company’s estimates, its profitability would be adversely affected. Pursuant to the Distribution Agreement with New SAIC and upon the separation date, the Company's liability of $45 million of net amounts to be refunded to customers for potential adjustments from such audit or review of contract costs was allocated to New SAIC in the amount of $18 million and the Company in the amount of $27 million. For open periods prior to the spin-off, matters may be settled by the Company with reimbursements due from New SAIC. Subsequent to the separation date, any amounts owed in addition to the $45 million liability for periods prior to the separation date will be apportioned between Leidos and New SAIC in accordance with the Distribution Agreement. As of October 2, 2015, the Company has recorded a total liability of $41 million for its current best estimate of net amounts to be refunded to customers for potential adjustments from such audits or reviews of contract costs. This amount includes potential adjustments related to both pre-separation and post-separation audits or reviews and excludes amounts assumed to be reimbursed by New SAIC. Tax Audits and Reviews The Company files income tax returns in the United States and various state and foreign jurisdictions and is subject to routine compliance reviews by the IRS and other taxing authorities. The Company has effectively settled with the IRS for all fiscal years prior to fiscal year 2015. With a few exceptions, as of October 2, 2015, the Company is no longer subject to state, local, or foreign examinations by the tax authorities for years before fiscal 2012. As of October 2, 2015, the balance of unrecognized tax benefits included liabilities for uncertain tax positions of $21 million, $5 million of which were classified as other long-term liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheet. During the next 12 months, it is reasonably possible that resolution of reviews by taxing authorities, both domestic and international, could be reached with respect to $16 million of the Company’s unrecognized tax benefits either because the Company’s tax positions are sustained or because the Company agrees to their disallowance and pays the related income tax. This is dependent on the timing of ongoing examinations as well as any outstanding litigation and expiration of statute of limitations. Letters of Credit and Surety Bonds The Company has outstanding letters of credit of $68 million as of October 2, 2015, principally related to guarantees on contracts. The Company also has outstanding surety bonds in the amount of $238 million, principally related to performance and subcontractor payment bonds on the Company’s contracts. The outstanding letters of credit and surety bonds have various terms with the majority of the letters of credit and bonds expiring over the next five fiscal years. Certain letters of credit and surety bonds have auto-renewal periods that will extend their expiration dates past the next five fiscal years.
Leidos, Inc.
Other Commitments and Contingencies	Other Commitments and Contingencies: VirnetX, Inc. In fiscal 2007, the Company transferred several patents to VirnetX Inc., a subsidiary of VirnetX Holding Corp. In consideration of this transfer, the Company received certain license rights and the right to receive a percentage of the consideration received in patent infringement or enforcement claims against third parties. In November 2012, a jury found that Apple Corporation infringed two of the patents that the Company previously transferred to VirnetX and awarded approximately $368 million to VirnetX, but the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated this award. Although VirnetX petitioned the appeals court for an en banc review, this request was denied and the case has been remanded to the Federal District Court for further proceedings. On December 17, 2014, VirnetX settled a separate patent infringement dispute with Microsoft Corporation, with those parties executing an Amended Settlement and License Agreement. This agreement amended and restated certain terms of the original Settlement and License Agreement, dated May 14, 2010, between VirnetX and Microsoft. Under the terms of the amended agreement, Microsoft agreed to pay $23 million to VirnetX to settle the patent dispute and expand Microsoft's license. Under its agreements with VirnetX, the Company has received proceeds in the second and third quarter of the current year from VirnetX in the amount of $10 million, $8 million of which was received during the third quarter ended October 2, 2015, from VirnetX's settlement with Microsoft and VirnetX's settlement of a previous litigation matter against various defendants, including Mitel, Siemens and Avaya. Pursuant to the agreements with VirnetX, the amount received by the Company includes reimbursement for attorneys' fees and costs incurred by the Company in connection with these litigation matters. In addition, the Company is required to pay a royalty on the proceeds received to the customer who paid for the development of the technology. The Company does not have any material assets or liabilities recorded in connection with this matter as of October 2, 2015. Government Investigations and Reviews The Company is routinely subject to investigations and reviews relating to compliance with various laws and regulations with respect to its role as a contractor to federal, state, and local government customers and in connection with performing services in countries outside of the United States. Adverse findings in these investigations or reviews can lead to criminal, civil or administrative proceedings, and the Company could face penalties, fines, compensatory damages, and suspension or debarment from doing business with governmental agencies. In addition, the Company could suffer serious reputational harm if allegations of impropriety were made against Leidos. Adverse findings could also have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, condensed consolidated financial position, results of operations, and cash flows due to its reliance on government contracts. U.S. Government agencies, including the Defense Contract Audit Agency ("DCAA"), Defense Contract Management Agency ("DCMA"), and others, routinely audit and review a contractor’s performance on government contracts, indirect rates and pricing practices, and compliance with applicable contracting and procurement laws, regulations, and standards. They also review the adequacy of the contractor’s compliance with government standards for its business systems, including: a contractor’s accounting system, earned value management system, estimating system, materials management and accounting system, property management system, and purchasing system. Both contractors and the U.S. Government agencies conducting these audits and reviews have come under increased scrutiny including such subjects as billing practices, labor charging, and accounting for unallowable costs. As a result, audits and reviews have become more rigorous and the standards to which the Company is held are being more strictly interpreted, increasing the likelihood of an audit or review resulting in an adverse outcome. During the course of its current audits, the DCAA is closely examining and questioning costs and several of the Company’s long established and disclosed practices, increasing the uncertainty as to the ultimate conclusion that will be reached. In addition, the Company also monitors compliance with these practices and has an obligation under its contracts to make disclosures of specific improprieties based on credible evidence. The Company changed its indirect rate structure used in its indirect cost system in fiscal 2011 and future years. The DCAA is performing reviews of these changes and the Company’s compliance with certain other U.S. Government Cost Accounting Standards. A finding of significant control deficiencies in the Company’s system audits or other reviews can result in cash payments, penalties and potentially decremented billing rates. The Company’s indirect cost audits by the DCAA remain open for fiscal 2011 and subsequent fiscal years. Although the Company has recorded contract revenues subsequent to and including fiscal 2011 based upon an estimate of costs that the Company believes will be approved upon final audit or review, the Company does not know the outcome of any ongoing or future audits or reviews and adjustments, and if future adjustments exceed the Company’s estimates, its profitability would be adversely affected. Pursuant to the Distribution Agreement with New SAIC and upon the separation date, the Company's liability of $45 million of net amounts to be refunded to customers for potential adjustments from such audit or review of contract costs was allocated to New SAIC in the amount of $18 million and the Company in the amount of $27 million. For open periods prior to the spin-off, matters may be settled by the Company with reimbursements due from New SAIC. Subsequent to the separation date, any amounts owed in addition to the $45 million liability for periods prior to the separation date will be apportioned between Leidos and New SAIC in accordance with the Distribution Agreement. As of October 2, 2015, the Company has recorded a total liability of $41 million for its current best estimate of net amounts to be refunded to customers for potential adjustments from such audits or reviews of contract costs. This amount includes potential adjustments related to both pre-separation and post-separation audits or reviews and excludes amounts assumed to be reimbursed by New SAIC. Tax Audits and Reviews The Company files income tax returns in the United States and various state and foreign jurisdictions and is subject to routine compliance reviews by the IRS and other taxing authorities. The Company has effectively settled with the IRS for all fiscal years prior to fiscal year 2015. With a few exceptions, as of October 2, 2015, the Company is no longer subject to state, local, or foreign examinations by the tax authorities for years before fiscal 2012. As of October 2, 2015, the balance of unrecognized tax benefits included liabilities for uncertain tax positions of $21 million, $5 million of which were classified as other long-term liabilities in the condensed consolidated balance sheet. During the next 12 months, it is reasonably possible that resolution of reviews by taxing authorities, both domestic and international, could be reached with respect to $16 million of the Company’s unrecognized tax benefits either because the Company’s tax positions are sustained or because the Company agrees to their disallowance and pays the related income tax. This is dependent on the timing of ongoing examinations as well as any outstanding litigation and expiration of statute of limitations. Letters of Credit and Surety Bonds The Company has outstanding letters of credit of $68 million as of October 2, 2015, principally related to guarantees on contracts. The Company also has outstanding surety bonds in the amount of $238 million, principally related to performance and subcontractor payment bonds on the Company’s contracts. The outstanding letters of credit and surety bonds have various terms with the majority of the letters of credit and bonds expiring over the next five fiscal years. Certain letters of credit and surety bonds have auto-renewal periods that will extend their expiration dates past the next five fiscal years.