Form 10-K

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulations S-T(§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§229.405 of this chapter) 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 of this Form 10-K. ¨

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

Large accelerated filer x Accelerated filer ¨ Non-accelerated filer ¨ Smaller reporting company ¨

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant calculated using the market price as of the close of business June 30, 2009 was $5,766,693,594.

Number of shares outstanding of registrant’s common stock, $1.00 par value, as of February 22, 2010:

Portions of the Mattel, Inc. 2009 Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) within 120 days after the close of the registrant’s fiscal year (incorporated into Part III).

Mattel, Inc. (“Mattel”) designs, manufactures, and markets a broad variety of toy products worldwide through sales to its customers and directly to consumers. Mattel’s vision is to provide “the world’s premier toy brands—today and tomorrow.” Management has set six key company strategies: (i) improve execution of the existing toy business; (ii) globalize the brands; (iii) extend the brands into new areas; (iv) catch new trends, create new brands, and enter new categories; (v) develop people; and (vi) improve productivity, simplify processes, and maintain customer service levels.

Mattel believes its products are among the most widely recognized toy products in the world. Mattel’s portfolio of brands and products are grouped in the following categories:

Mattel Girls & Boys Brands—including Barbie^® fashion dolls and accessories (“Barbie^®”), Polly Pocket^®, Little Mommy^®, Disney Classics^®, and High School Musical^® (collectively “Other Girls Brands”), Hot Wheels^®, Matchbox^® , Battle Force 5™, Speed Racer^®, and Tyco R/C^® vehicles and play sets (collectively “Wheels”), and CARS™, Radica^®, Toy Story^®, Max Steel^®, Speed Racer^®, Batman^®, and Kung Fu Panda^® products, and games and puzzles (collectively “Entertainment”).

Fisher-Price Brands—including Fisher-Price^®, Little People^®, BabyGear™, and View-Master^® (collectively “Core Fisher-Price^®”), Sesame Street^® , Dora the Explorer^®, Go Diego Go! ^®, and See ‘N Say^® (collectively “Fisher-Price^® Friends”), and Power Wheels^®.

American Girl Brands—including Just Like You^®, the historical collection, and Bitty Baby^®. American Girl Brands products are sold directly to consumers via its catalogue, website, and proprietary retail stores. Its children’s publications are also sold to certain retailers.

Mattel was incorporated in California in 1948 and reincorporated in Delaware in 1968. Its executive offices are located at 333 Continental Blvd., El Segundo, California 90245-5012, telephone number (310) 252-2000.

“Mattel” refers to Mattel, Inc. and its subsidiaries as a whole, unless the context requires otherwise. This narrative discussion applies to all segments except where otherwise stated. Mattel’s reportable segments are separately managed business units and are divided on a geographic basis between domestic and international. The Domestic segment is further divided into Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US, Fisher-Price Brands US, and American Girl Brands.

For additional information on Mattel’s operating segment reporting, including revenues, segment income, and assets, see Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Results of Operations—Operating Segment Results” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Segment Information.” For additional information regarding geographic areas, see Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Segment Information.” For a discussion of the risks inherent in the foreign operations of Mattel, which affect each segment, see Item 1A “Risk Factors—Factors That May Affect Future Results.”

The Domestic segment develops toys that it markets and sells through the Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US, Fisher-Price Brands US, and American Girl Brands segments.

In the Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US segment, Barbie^® includes brands such as Barbie^® fashion dolls and accessories, and Polly Pocket^®, Little Mommy^®, Disney Classics^®, and High School Musical^® are included

within Other Girls Brands. Wheels includes Hot Wheels^®, Matchbox^®, Battle Force 5™, Speed Racer^®, and Tyco R/C^® vehicles and play sets. Entertainment includes CARS™, Radica^®, Toy Story^®, Speed Racer^®, Batman^®, and Kung Fu Panda^® products, as well as games and puzzles.

In 2010, Mattel expects to introduce new products, as well as continue to leverage content within its core brands. For Mattel Girls Brands, Barbie^® will be celebrating her aspirational career heritage with the introduction of twenty new careers, including Barbie^®’s 125^th career. Barbie^® will be expanding the Fashionistas line and will continue to build the collector business with new introductions to the tween market. New Barbie^® product introductions will support the full-length animated launches of Barbie in a Mermaid Tale™ in spring 2010 and Barbie^® A Fashion Fairytale in fall 2010. Polly Pocket^® will expand in 2010 with new styles, new characters, and new ways to play. Additionally, Disney Princess™ will feature new products based on a computer-animated feature film.

Also in 2010, Hot Wheels^® will introduce extensions to its TrickTracks^® and Color Shifters™ product lines, as well as new product lines such as Custom Motors. Hot Wheels^® Battle Force 5™ will continue as an animated TV series on the Cartoon Network^® and will be supported by a new product line. Matchbox^® will follow up on its successful 2009 introduction of Rocky The Robot Truck™ with a new range of Big Rig Buddies™ products. The Entertainment business will expand in 2010 to include new products based on WWE^® Wrestling, and Mattel will release new products based on Disney/Pixar’s upcoming Toy Story^® 3 movie in 2010 and will continue to market new product extensions of Disney/Pixar’s successful CARS™ franchise. Mattel will also continue to release products based on the popular DC Comics line, including the Batman^®: The Brave and the Bold^® animated TV series. For games and puzzles, Mattel will continue to support extensions of its popular UNO^®, Apples to Apples^®, and Blokus^® brands. Mattel will also continue to offer innovative ways to play, including the Mindflex™ game.

The Fisher-Price Brands US segment includes Fisher-Price^®, Little People^®, BabyGear™, View-Master^®, Dora the Explorer^®, Go Diego Go!^®, Mickey Mouse^® Clubhouse, Handy Manny^®, See ‘N Say^®, Ni Hao, Kai-lan^®, and Power Wheels^®. New product introductions for 2010 are expected to include the Laugh & Learn^™Learn & Move Music Station, IXL^® Learning System, Lil’ Zoomers^™Spinnin’ Sounds Speedway, Little People^® Wheelies Stand ‘n Play Rampway, Imaginext^™Bigfoot the Monster, Trio^® Batcave™, Newborn Rock ‘n Play Sleeper, iGlide^™, Dance Star Mickey^®, We Did It Dora, Dora All-Seasons Dollhouse, Thomas the Tank Engine and Friends™, and the Thomas and Friends^® Zip, Zoom & Logging Adventure™.

The American Girl Brands segment is a direct marketer, children’s publisher, and retailer best known for its flagship line of historical dolls, books, and accessories, as well as the Just Like You^® and Bitty Baby^® brands. American Girl Brands also publishes best-selling Advice & Activity books and the award-winning American Girl^® magazine. In January 2010, American Girl^® introduced Lanie™, the newest Girl of the Year^® doll. American Girl Brands products are sold only in the US and Canada.

Products marketed by the International segment are generally the same as those developed and marketed by the Domestic segment, with the exception of American Girl Brands, although some are developed or adapted for particular international markets. Mattel’s products are sold directly to retailers and wholesalers in most European, Latin American, and Asian countries, and in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, and through agents and distributors in those countries where Mattel has no direct presence.

Mattel’s International segment revenue represented 46% of worldwide consolidated gross sales in 2009. Within the International segment, Mattel operates in four regional groups that generated the following gross sales during 2009:

No individual country within the International segment exceeded 5% of worldwide consolidated gross sales during 2009.

The strength of the US dollar relative to other currencies can significantly affect the revenues and profitability of Mattel’s international operations. Mattel enters into foreign currency forward exchange contracts, primarily to hedge its purchase and sale of inventory, and other intercompany transactions denominated in foreign currencies, to limit the effect of exchange rate fluctuations on its results of operations and cash flows. See Item 7A “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Derivative Instruments.” For financial information by geographic area, see Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Segment Information.”

Mattel manufactures toy products for all segments in both company-owned facilities and through third-party manufacturers. Products are also purchased from unrelated entities that design, develop, and manufacture those products. To provide greater flexibility in the manufacture and delivery of its products, and as part of a continuing effort to reduce manufacturing costs, Mattel has concentrated production of most of its core products in company-owned facilities and generally uses third-party manufacturers for the production of non-core products.

Mattel’s principal manufacturing facilities are located in China, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Mexico. To help avoid disruption of its product supply due to political instability, civil unrest, economic instability, changes in government policies, and other risks, Mattel produces its products in multiple facilities in multiple countries. Mattel believes that the existing production capacity at its own and its third-party manufacturers’ facilities is sufficient to handle expected volume in the foreseeable future. See Item 1A “Risk Factors—Factors That May Affect Future Results.”

Mattel bases its production schedules for toy products on customer orders and forecasts, taking into account historical trends, results of market research, and current market information. Actual shipments of products ordered and order cancellation rates are affected by consumer acceptance of product lines, strength of competing products, marketing strategies of retailers, changes in buying patterns of both retailers and consumers, and overall economic conditions. Unexpected changes in these factors could result in a lack of product availability or excess inventory in a particular product line.

The foreign countries in which most of Mattel’s products are manufactured (principally China, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Mexico) all enjoy permanent “normal trade relations” (“NTR”) status under US tariff laws, which provides a favorable category of US import duties. China’s NTR status became permanent in 2002,

following enactment of a bill authorizing such status upon the country’s accession to the World Trade Organization (“WTO”), which occurred in 2001. Membership in the WTO substantially reduces the possibility of China losing its NTR status, which would result in increased costs for Mattel and others in the toy industry.

All US duties on toys were completely eliminated upon implementation of the Uruguay Round WTO agreement in 1995. The European Union, Japan, and Canada eliminated their tariffs on most toy categories through staged reductions that were completed by January 1, 2004. The primary toy tariffs still maintained by these countries are a European Union tariff of 4.7% on dolls, play sets, most plastic toys, and die cast metal toy vehicles, a Japanese tariff on dolls of 3.9%, and a Canadian tariff of 8.0% on ride on toys, doll carriages, and wagons.

The majority of Mattel’s raw materials are available from numerous suppliers, but may be subject to fluctuations in price.

Competition in the manufacture, marketing, and sale of toys is based primarily on quality, play value, and price. Mattel offers a diverse range of products for children of all ages and families that include, among others, toys for infants and preschoolers, girls’ toys, boys’ toys, youth electronics, hand-held and other games, puzzles, educational toys, media-driven products, and fashion-related toys. The Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US and Fisher-Price Brands US segments compete with several large toy companies, including Bandai, Hasbro, Jakks Pacific, Leap Frog, Lego, MGA Entertainment, and VTech, many smaller toy companies, and several manufacturers of video games and consumer electronics. American Girl Brands competes with companies that manufacture girls’ toys and with children’s book publishers and retailers. Mattel’s International segment competes with global toy companies including Bandai, Hasbro, Lego, Tomy, and MGA Entertainment, and other national and regional toy companies and manufacturers of video games and consumer electronics. Foreign regions may include competitors that are strong in a particular toy line or geographical area, but do not compete with Mattel or other international toy companies worldwide.

Competition among the above companies is intensifying due to recent trends towards shorter life cycles for individual toy products, the phenomenon of children outgrowing toys at younger ages, and an increasing use of high technology in toys. In addition, a small number of retailers account for a large portion of all toy sales, control the shelf space from which toys are viewed, and have direct contact with parents and children through in-store purchases, coupons, and print advertisements. Such retailers can and do promote their own private-label toys, facilitate the sale of competitors’ toys, and allocate shelf space to one type of toys over another.

Mattel’s business is highly seasonal, with consumers making a large percentage of all toy purchases during the traditional holiday season. A significant portion of Mattel’s customers’ purchasing occurs in the third and fourth quarters of Mattel’s fiscal year in anticipation of such holiday buying. These seasonal purchasing patterns and requisite production lead times cause risk to Mattel’s business associated with the underproduction of popular toys and the overproduction of less popular toys that do not match consumer demand. Retailers are also attempting to manage their inventories more tightly in recent years, requiring Mattel to ship products closer to the time the retailers expect to sell the products to consumers. These factors increase the risk that Mattel may not be able to meet demand for certain products at peak demand times, or that Mattel’s own inventory levels may be adversely impacted by the need to pre-build products before orders are placed. Additionally, as retailers manage their inventories, Mattel experiences cyclical ordering patterns for products and product lines that may cause its sales to vary significantly from period to period.

In anticipation of retail sales in the traditional holiday season, Mattel significantly increases its production in advance of the peak selling period, resulting in a corresponding build-up of inventory levels in the first three

quarters of its fiscal year. Seasonal shipping patterns result in significant peaks in the third and fourth quarters in the respective levels of inventories and accounts receivable, which result in seasonal working capital financing requirements. See “Seasonal Financing.”

Through its product design and development group, Mattel regularly refreshes, redesigns, and extends existing toy product lines and develops innovative new toy product lines for all segments. Mattel believes its success is dependent on its ability to continue this activity effectively. See Item 1A “Risk Factors—Factors That May Affect Future Results.” Product design and development activities are principally conducted by a group of professional designers and engineers employed by Mattel. During 2009, 2008, and 2007, Mattel incurred expenses of $171.3 million, $190.2 million, and $189.4 million, respectively, in connection with the design and development of products, exclusive of royalty payments. See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Supplemental Financial Information.”

Additionally, independent toy designers and developers bring concepts and products to Mattel and are generally paid a royalty on the net selling price of products licensed to Mattel. These independent toy designers may also create different products for other toy companies.

Mattel supports its product lines with extensive advertising and consumer promotions. Advertising takes place at varying levels throughout the year and peaks during the traditional holiday season. Advertising includes television and radio commercials, and magazine, newspaper, and internet advertisements. Promotions include in-store displays, sweepstakes, merchandising materials, and major events focusing on products and tie-ins with various consumer products companies.

During 2009, 2008, and 2007, Mattel incurred expenses of $609.8 million (11.2% of net sales), $719.2 million (12.2% of net sales), and $708.8 million (11.9% of net sales), respectively, for advertising and promotion.

Mattel’s products are sold throughout the world. Products within the Domestic segment are sold directly to retailers, including discount and free-standing toy stores, chain stores, department stores, other retail outlets, and, to a limited extent, wholesalers by Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US and Fisher-Price Brands US. Mattel also operates several small retail outlets, generally near or at its corporate headquarters and distribution centers as a service to its employees and as an outlet for its products. American Girl Brands products are sold directly to consumers and its children’s publications are also sold to certain retailers. Mattel has seven retail stores, American Girl Place^® in Chicago, Illinois, New York, New York, and Los Angeles, California, and American Girl Boutique and Bistro^® in Atlanta, Georgia, Dallas, Texas, Natick, Massachusetts, and Bloomington, Minnesota, each of which features children’s products from the American Girl Brands segment. American Girl Brands also has a retail outlet in Oshkosh, Wisconsin that serves as an outlet for its products. Products within the International segment are sold directly to retailers and wholesalers in most European, Latin American, and Asian countries, and in Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, and through agents and distributors in those countries where Mattel has no direct presence. Mattel also has retail outlets in Latin America and Europe that serve as outlets for its products. Additionally, Mattel sells certain of its products online through its website.

During 2009, Mattel’s three largest customers (Wal-Mart at $1.0 billion, Toys “R” Us at $0.7 billion, and Target at $0.5 billion) accounted for approximately 40% of worldwide consolidated net sales in the aggregate. Within countries in the International segment, there is also a concentration of sales to certain large customers that do not operate in the US. The customers and the degree of concentration vary depending upon the region or

nation. See Item 1A “Risk Factors—Factors That May Affect Future Results” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Segment Information.”

Mattel has license agreements with third parties that permit Mattel to utilize the trademark, characters, or inventions of the licensor in products that Mattel sells. A number of these licenses relate to product lines that are significant to Mattel’s business and operations.

Mattel has entered into agreements to license entertainment properties from, among others, Disney Enterprises, Inc. (including Disney^® characters such as Disney Princess™, CARS™ and Toy Story^® from Pixar, High School Musical^®, Winnie the Pooh^®, and all Disney^® films and television properties for use in Mattel’s games), Viacom International, Inc. relating to its Nickelodeon^® properties (including Dora the Explorer^®, Go Diego Go!^®, and SpongeBob SquarePants^®), Warner Bros. Consumer Products (including Batman^®, Superman^®, Justice League^®, and Speed Racer^®), Sesame Workshop^® (relating to its Sesame Street^® properties including Elmo™), WWE^® Wrestling, and HIT Entertainment™ relating to its Thomas and Friends^® properties.

Royalty expense during 2009, 2008, and 2007 was $188.5 million, $241.2 million, and $243.3 million, respectively. See “Product Design and Development” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Commitments and Contingencies.”

Mattel also licenses a number of its trademarks, characters, and other property rights to others for use in connection with the sale of non-toy products that do not compete with Mattel’s products. Mattel distributes some third-party finished products that are independently designed and manufactured.

Most of Mattel’s products are sold under trademarks, trade names, and copyrights, and a number of those products incorporate patented devices or designs. Trade names and trademarks are significant assets of Mattel in that they provide product recognition and acceptance worldwide.

Mattel customarily seeks patent, trademark, or copyright protection covering its products, and it owns or has applications pending for US and foreign patents covering many of its products. A number of these trademarks and copyrights relate to product lines that are significant to Mattel’s business and operations. Mattel believes its rights to these properties are adequately protected, but there can be no assurance that its rights can be successfully asserted in the future or will not be invalidated, circumvented, or challenged.

In the normal course of business, Mattel enters into contractual arrangements for future purchases of goods and services to ensure availability and timely delivery, and to obtain and protect Mattel’s right to create and market certain products. Certain of these commitments routinely contain provisions for guarantees or minimum expenditures during the term of the contracts. Current and future commitments for guaranteed payments reflect Mattel’s focus on expanding its product lines through alliances with businesses in other industries.

As of December 31, 2009, Mattel had approximately $267 million of outstanding commitments for purchases of inventory, other assets, and services in fiscal year 2010. Licensing and similar agreements with terms extending through 2014 and beyond contain provisions for future guaranteed minimum payments aggregating approximately $241 million. See Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Commitments” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Commitments and Contingencies.”

Mattel ships products in accordance with delivery schedules specified by its customers, which usually request delivery within three months. In the toy industry, orders are subject to cancellation or change at any time prior to shipment. In recent years, a trend toward just-in-time inventory practices in the toy industry has resulted in fewer advance orders and therefore less backlog of orders. Mattel believes that the amount of backlog orders at any given time may not accurately indicate future sales.

Currency exchange rate fluctuations may impact Mattel’s results of operations and cash flows. Mattel seeks to mitigate its exposure to market risk by monitoring its foreign currency transaction exposure for the year and partially hedging such exposure using foreign currency forward exchange contracts primarily to hedge its purchase and sale of inventory, and other intercompany transactions denominated in foreign currencies. These contracts generally have maturity dates of up to 18 months. In addition, Mattel manages its exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations through the selection of currencies used for international borrowings. Mattel does not trade in financial instruments for speculative purposes.

For additional information regarding foreign currency contracts, see “International Segment” above, Item 7A “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Derivative Instruments.”

See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Seasonal Financing and Debt.”

Mattel’s toy products sold in the US are subject to the provisions of the Consumer Product Safety Act, the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, and the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act of 2008, and may also be subject to the requirements of the Flammable Fabrics Act or the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act, and the regulations promulgated pursuant to such statutes. These statutes ban from the market consumer products that fail to comply with applicable product safety regulations. The Consumer Product Safety Commission (“CPSC”) may require the recall, repurchase, replacement, or repair of any such banned products or products that otherwise create a substantial risk of injury and may seek penalties for regulatory noncompliance under certain circumstances. Similar laws exist in some states and in many international markets.

Mattel maintains a quality control program to help ensure compliance with various US federal, state, and applicable foreign product safety requirements. Nonetheless, Mattel has experienced, and may in the future experience, issues in products that result in recalls, withdrawals, or replacements of products. A product recall could have a material adverse effect on Mattel’s results of operations and financial condition, depending on the product affected by the recall and the extent of the recall efforts required. A product recall could also negatively affect Mattel’s reputation and the sales of other Mattel products. See Item 1A “Risk Factors—Factors That May Affect Future Results” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Product Recalls and Withdrawals.”

Mattel’s advertising is subject to the Federal Trade Commission Act, The Children’s Television Act of 1990, the rules and regulations promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission, and the Federal Communications Commission, as well as laws of certain countries that regulate advertising and advertising to children. In addition, Mattel’s websites that are directed towards children are subject to The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998. Mattel is subject to various other federal, state, local and international laws and regulations applicable to its business. Mattel believes that it is in substantial compliance with these laws and regulations.

Mattel’s world wide operations are subject to the requirements of various environmental laws and regulations in the jurisdictions where those operations are located. Mattel believes that it is in substantial compliance with those laws and regulations. Mattel’s operations are from time to time the subject of investigations, conferences, discussions, and negotiations with various federal, state and local environmental agencies within and outside the United States with respect to the discharge or cleanup of hazardous waste. We are not aware of any material cleanup liabilities.

The total number of persons employed by Mattel and its subsidiaries at any one time varies because of the seasonal nature of its manufacturing operations. At December 31, 2009, Mattel’s total number of employees was approximately 27,000.

The current executive officers of Mattel, all of whom are appointed annually by and serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors, are as follows:

Mr. Eckert has been Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer since May 2000. He was formerly President and Chief Executive Officer of Kraft Foods, Inc., the largest packaged food company in North America, from October 1997 until May 2000. From 1995 to 1997, Mr. Eckert was Group Vice President of Kraft Foods, Inc. From 1993 to 1995, Mr. Eckert was President of the Oscar Mayer foods division of Kraft Foods, Inc. Mr. Eckert worked for Kraft Foods, Inc. for 23 years prior to joining Mattel.

Ms. Brothers has been Executive Vice President of Mattel and President, American Girl since July 2000. From November 1998 to July 2000, she was Senior Vice President of Operations, Pleasant Company (which merged with and into Mattel on December 31, 2003, followed immediately on January 1, 2004, by an asset transfer to Mattel’s subsidiary American Girl). From January 1997 to November 1998, she was Vice President of the Catalogue Division, Pleasant Company. She joined Pleasant Company in 1995, prior to its acquisition by Mattel in July 1998, as Vice President of Catalogue Marketing.

Mr. Debrowski has been Executive Vice President, Worldwide Operations since November 2000. From February 1992 until November 2000, he was Senior Vice President-Operations and a director of The Pillsbury Company. From September 1991 until February 1992, he was Vice President of Operations for the Baked Goods Division of The Pillsbury Company. Prior to that, he served as Vice President and Director of Grocery Operations for Kraft U.S.A.

Mr. Farr has been Chief Financial Officer since February 2000. From September 1996 to February 2000, he was Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller. From June 1993 to September 1996, he served as Vice President, Tax. Prior to that, he served as Senior Director, Tax from August 1992 to June 1993.

Mr. Friedman has been President, Mattel Brands (which includes Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US and Fisher-Price Brands US) since October 2005. From March 1999 to October 2005, he was President, Fisher-Price Brands. From August 1995 to March 1999, he was President, Tyco Preschool. For more than five years prior to that time, he was President of MCA/Universal Merchandising, Senior Vice President-Sales, Marketing and Design of Just Toys, Vice President and General Manager of Baby Care for Gerber Products, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Lionel Leisure, Inc., and President of Aviva/Hasbro.

Mr. Kaye has been Senior Vice President of Human Resources since July 1997. Prior to joining Mattel, he worked as head of Human Resources at two other Fortune 500 companies in the banking industry and construction industry, serving as a line executive for the latter. Earlier in his career, he worked with the Hay Group, a compensation consulting firm, and for 12 years with IBM in various human resources positions.

Mr. Massingberd has been Senior Vice President, Corporate Responsibility since September 2007. From February 1998 to August 2007, he served as Senior Vice President and General Manager of Mattel’s International divisions in Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Asia, and Latin America and from August 1997 to February 1998, he was Vice President, Sales for Mattel Canada. Prior to joining Mattel, Mr. Massingberd spent 18 years with Nestle S.A. and served in various roles, including Vice President, Sales and head of Nestle Canada’s Confectionery division.

Mr. Normile has been Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary since March 1999. He served as Vice President, Associate General Counsel and Secretary from August 1994 to March 1999. From June 1992 to August 1994, he served as Assistant General Counsel. Prior to that, he was associated with the law firms of Latham & Watkins LLP and Sullivan & Cromwell LLP.

Mr. Stockton has been President, International since November 2007. He served as Executive Vice President, International from February 2003 to November 2007. He served as Executive Vice President, Business Planning and Development from November 2000 until February 2003. From April 1998 until November 2000, he was President and Chief Executive Officer of Basic Vegetable Products, the largest manufacturer of vegetable ingredients in the world. For more than 20 years prior to that, he was employed by Kraft Foods, Inc., the largest packaged food company in North America, and was President of Kraft North American Food Service from August 1996 to March 1998.

Ms. Douglas has been Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Treasurer since September 2008. She served as Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer from July 2005 to September 2008. From November 2003 until July 2005, she served as Senior Vice President of External Affairs, which included oversight of Investor Relations, Corporate Communications, Consumer Relations, Government Affairs, and Philanthropy. Prior to that, she served from March 2001 to October 2003 as Vice President, Investor Relations. Prior to joining Mattel, Ms. Douglas spent 17 years with Associates First Capital Corporation, most recently as Senior Vice President, Investor Relations.

Mr. Topham has been Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller since September 2005. He served as Senior Vice President and Treasurer from March 2005 to August 2005 and as Vice President and Treasurer from

March 2004 to March 2005. Prior to that, he served as Vice President and Assistant Controller from May 2001 to March 2004. From August 2000 to May 2001, he served as Vice President and Treasurer of Premier Practice Management, Inc. From June 1999 to August 2000, he served as Division Vice President of Dataworks, Inc., a specialized publishing company. Prior to that, he spent eight years with Total Petroleum (North America) Ltd., most recently as Vice President of Human Resources.

Mattel files its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, Proxy Statements and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) with the SEC. The public may read and copy any materials that Mattel files with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov.

Mattel’s Internet website address is http://www.mattel.com. Mattel makes available on its Internet website, free of charge, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, Proxy Statements and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after such materials are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC.

(Cautionary Statement Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995)

Mattel is including this Cautionary Statement to make applicable and take advantage of the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (the “Act”) for forward-looking statements. This Annual Report on Form 10-K includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Act. Forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They often include words such as “believes,” “expects,” “anticipates,” “estimates,” “intends,” “plans,” “seeks” or words of similar meaning, or future or conditional verbs, such as “will,” “should,” “could,” “may,” “aims,” “intends,” or “projects.” A forward-looking statement is neither a prediction nor a guarantee of future events or circumstances, and those future events or circumstances may not occur. Investors should not place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Form 10-K. These forward-looking statements are all based on currently available operating, financial, economic and competitive information and are subject to various risks and uncertainties. The Company’s actual future results and trends may differ materially depending on a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, the risks and uncertainties discussed below.

If the current global economic conditions continue to deteriorate, Mattel’s business and financial results may continue to be adversely affected.

The global economic conditions adversely impacted Mattel’s business and financial results in 2009. Mattel designs, manufactures, and markets a wide variety of toy products worldwide through sales to customers and directly to consumers. Our performance is impacted by the level of discretionary consumer spending, which has deteriorated sharply in the United States and in many countries around the world in which Mattel does business. Consumers’ discretionary purchases of toy products may be impacted by job losses, foreclosures, bankruptcies, reduced access to credit, significantly falling home prices, lower consumer confidence and other macroeconomic factors that affect consumer spending behavior. If our customers encounter liquidity problems due to weak retail sales or their inability to raise sufficient capital due to credit constraints, we may not be able to collect the accounts receivable from the affected customers. Finally, many of the effects and consequences of the current

global economic conditions are not yet known; any one or all of them could potentially have a material adverse effect on Mattel’s liquidity and capital resources, including increasing our cost of capital or our ability to raise additional capital if needed, or otherwise negatively impact Mattel’s business and financial results.

If Mattel does not successfully identify or satisfy consumer preferences, its results of operations may be adversely affected.

Mattel’s business and operating results depend largely upon the appeal of its toy products. Consumer preferences, particularly among end users of Mattel’s products–children–are continuously changing. Significant, sudden shifts in demand are caused by “hit” toys and trends, which are often unpredictable. Mattel offers a diverse range of products for children of all ages and families that includes, among others, toys for infants and preschoolers, girls’ toys, boys’ toys, youth electronics, digital media, hand-held and other games, puzzles, educational toys, media-driven products, and fashion-related toys. Mattel competes domestically and internationally with a wide range of large and small manufacturers, marketers and sellers of toys, video games, consumer electronics and other play products, as well as retailers, which means that Mattel’s market position is always at risk. Mattel’s ability to maintain its current product sales, and increase its product sales or establish product sales with new, innovative toys, will depend on Mattel’s ability to satisfy play preferences, enhance existing products, develop and introduce new products, and achieve market acceptance of these products. Competition for access to entertainment properties could lessen our ability to secure, maintain, and renew popular licenses to entertainment products or require us to pay licensors higher royalties and higher minimum guaranteed payments in order to obtain or retain these licenses. Competition is intensifying due to recent trends towards shorter life cycles for individual toy products, the phenomenon of children outgrowing toys at younger ages, and an increasing use of more sophisticated technology in toys. If Mattel does not successfully meet the challenges outlined above in a timely and cost-effective manner, demand for its products could decrease, and Mattel’s revenues, profitability and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Inaccurately anticipating changes and trends in popular culture, media and movies, fashion, or technology can negatively affect Mattel’s sales.

Successful movies and characters in children’s literature affect play preferences, and many toys depend on media-based intellectual property licenses. Media-based licenses can cause a line of toys to gain immediate success among children, parents, or families. Trends in media, movies, and children’s characters change swiftly and contribute to the transience and uncertainty of play preferences. In addition, certain developments in the entertainment industry, including labor strikes, could cause delay or interruption in the release of new movies and television programs and could adversely affect the sales of Mattel’s toys based on such movies and television programs. Mattel responds to such trends and developments by modifying, refreshing, extending, and expanding its product offerings on an annual basis. If Mattel does not accurately anticipate trends in popular culture, movies, media, fashion, or technology, its products may not be accepted by children, parents, or families and Mattel’s revenues, profitability, and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Mattel’s business is highly seasonal and its operating results depend, in large part, on sales during the relatively brief traditional holiday season. Any events that disrupt our business during our peak demand times could significantly, adversely and disproportionately affect Mattel’s business.

Mattel’s business is subject to risks associated with the underproduction of popular toys and the overproduction of toys that do not match consumer demand. Sales of toy products at retail are highly seasonal, with a majority of retail sales occurring during the period from September through December. As a result, Mattel’s operating results depend, in large part, on sales during the relatively brief traditional holiday season. Retailers attempt to manage their inventories tightly, which requires Mattel to ship products closer to the time the retailers expect to sell the products to consumers. This in turn results in shorter lead times for production. Management believes that the increase in “last minute” shopping during the holiday season and the popularity of gift cards (which often shift purchases to after the holiday season) may negatively impact customer re-orders

during the holiday season. These factors may decrease sales or increase the risks that Mattel may not be able to meet demand for certain products at peak demand times or that Mattel’s own inventory levels may be adversely impacted by the need to pre-build products before orders are placed.

In addition, as a result of the seasonal nature of our business, Mattel may be significantly and adversely affected, in a manner disproportionate to the impact on a company with sales spread more evenly throughout the year, by unforeseen events, such as terrorist attacks, economic shocks, earthquakes or other catastrophic events, that harm the retail environment or consumer buying patterns during our key selling season, or by events, such as strikes, disruptions in transportation or port delays, that interfere with the manufacture or shipment of goods during the critical months leading up to the holiday purchasing season.

Mattel has significant customer concentration, so that economic difficulties or changes in the purchasing policies or patterns of its major customers could have a significant impact on Mattel’s business and operating results.

A small number of customers account for a large share of Mattel’s net sales. In 2009, Mattel’s three largest customers, Wal-Mart, Toys “R” Us and Target, in the aggregate, accounted for approximately 40% of net sales, and its ten largest customers, in the aggregate, accounted for approximately 50% of net sales. The concentration of Mattel’s business with a relatively small number of customers may expose Mattel to a material adverse effect if one or more of Mattel’s large customers were to significantly reduce purchases for any reason, favor competitors or new entrants, or increase their direct competition with Mattel by expanding their private-label business. Customers make no binding long-term commitments to Mattel regarding purchase volumes and make all purchases by delivering one-time purchase orders. Any customer could reduce its overall purchases of Mattel’s products, reduce the number and variety of Mattel’s products that it carries and the shelf space allotted for Mattel’s products, or otherwise seek to materially change the terms of the business relationship at any time. Any such change could significantly harm Mattel’s business and operating results.

Significant increases in the price of commodities, transportation or labor, if not offset by declines in other input costs, or a reduction or interruption in the delivery of raw materials, components and finished products from Mattel’s vendors could negatively impact Mattel’s financial results.

Cost increases, whether resulting from rising costs of materials, compliance with existing or future regulatory requirements, transportation, services and labor could impact the profit margins realized by Mattel on the sale of its products. Because of market conditions, timing of pricing decisions, and other factors, there can be no assurance that Mattel will be able to offset any of these increased costs by adjusting the prices of its products. Increases in prices of Mattel’s products could result in lower sales. Mattel’s ability to meet customer demand depends, in part, on its ability to obtain timely and adequate delivery of materials, parts and components from its suppliers and internal manufacturing capacity. Mattel has experienced shortages in the past, including shortages of raw materials and components. Although Mattel works closely with suppliers to avoid these types of shortages, there can be no assurance that Mattel will not encounter these problems in the future. A reduction or interruption in supplies or in the delivery of finished products, whether resulting from more stringent regulatory requirements, suppliers, disruptions in transportation, port delays, labor strikes, lockouts, or otherwise, or a significant increase in the price of one or more supplies, such as fuel or resin (which is an oil-based product), could negatively impact Mattel’s financial results.

Significant changes in currency exchange rates or the ability to transfer capital across borders could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business and results of operations.

Mattel’s net investment in its foreign subsidiaries and its results of operations and cash flows are subject to changes in currency exchange rates and regulations. Mattel seeks to mitigate the exposure of its results of operations to fluctuations in currency exchange rates by partially hedging this exposure using foreign currency forward exchange contracts. These contracts are primarily used to hedge Mattel’s purchase and sale of inventory,

and other intercompany transactions denominated in foreign currencies. Government action may restrict Mattel’s ability to transfer capital across borders and may also impact the fluctuation of currencies in the countries where Mattel conducts business or has invested capital. Significant changes in currency exchange rates, reductions in Mattel’s ability to transfer its capital across borders, and changes in government-fixed currency exchange rates, including the Chinese yuan and Venezuelan bolivar fuerte, could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business and results of operations.

Failure to successfully implement new initiatives could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Mattel has announced, and in the future may announce, initiatives to reduce its costs, increase its efficiency, improve the execution of its core business, globalize and extend Mattel’s brands, catch new trends, create new brands, and offer new innovative products, enhance product safety, develop people, improve productivity, simplify processes, maintain customer service levels, as well as initiatives designed to drive sales growth, capitalize on Mattel’s scale advantage, and improve its supply chain. These initiatives involve investment of capital and complex decision-making as well as extensive and intensive execution, and the success of these initiatives is not assured. Failure to successfully implement any of these initiatives, or the failure of any of these initiatives to produce the results anticipated by management, could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Mattel’s business depends in large part on the success of its vendors and outsourcers, and Mattel’s brands and reputation may be harmed by actions taken by third-parties that are outside Mattel’s control. In addition, any material failure, inadequacy or interruption resulting from such vendors or outsourcings could harm Mattel’s ability to effectively operate its business.

As a part of our efforts to cut costs, achieve better efficiencies and increase productivity and service quality, Mattel relies significantly on vendor and outsourcing relationships with third parties for services and systems including manufacturing, transportation, logistics and information technology. Any shortcoming of a Mattel vendor or outsourcer, particularly an issue affecting the quality of these services or systems, may be attributed by customers to Mattel, thus damaging Mattel’s reputation, brand value and potentially affecting the results of operations. In addition, problems with transitioning these services and systems or operating failures with these vendors and outsourcers could cause delays in product sales, reduce efficiency of Mattel’s operations, and significant capital investments could be required to remediate the problem.

Increases in interest rates, reduction of Mattel’s credit ratings, contraction of credit availability or the inability of Mattel to meet the debt covenant requirements in its credit facilities could negatively impact Mattel’s ability to conduct its operations.

Increases in interest rates, both domestically and internationally, could negatively affect Mattel’s cost of financing its operations. Any reduction in Mattel’s credit ratings could increase the cost of obtaining financing. Mattel may be hindered from obtaining, or incur additional costs to obtain, additional credit in light of the current tight credit market environment. Additionally, Mattel’s ability to issue long-term debt and obtain seasonal financing could be adversely affected by factors such as market conditions and an inability to meet its debt covenant requirements, which include maintaining certain financial ratios. Mattel’s ability to conduct its operations could be negatively impacted should these or other adverse conditions affect its primary sources of liquidity.

Liquidity problems or bankruptcy of Mattel’s key customers could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Many of Mattel’s key customers are mass-market retailers. In the past, the mass-market retail channel in the US has experienced significant shifts in market share among competitors, causing some large retailers to

experience liquidity problems. Certain of Mattel’s customers filed for bankruptcy in 2008 and 2009 and the current global economic conditions have adversely affected the financial condition of most retailers. Mattel’s sales to customers are typically made on credit without collateral. There is a risk that customers will not pay, or that payment may be delayed, because of bankruptcy, contraction of credit availability to such customers or other factors beyond the control of Mattel, which could increase Mattel’s exposure to losses from bad debts. In addition, if these or other customers were to cease doing business as a result of bankruptcy or significantly reduce the number of stores operated, it could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.

If Mattel is not able to adequately protect its proprietary intellectual property and information, its results of operations could be adversely affected.

The value of Mattel’s business depends on its ability to protect its intellectual property and information, including its trademarks, trade names, copyrights, patents and trade secrets, in the US and around the world, as well as its customer, employee, and consumer data. If Mattel fails to protect its proprietary intellectual property and information, including any successful challenge to Mattel’s ownership of its intellectual property or material infringements of its intellectual property, could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Unfavorable resolution of pending and future litigation matters, and disputes, including those arising from recalls, withdrawals, or replacements of Mattel products, could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s financial condition.

Mattel is involved in a number of litigation and regulatory matters, including those arising from recalls, withdrawals, or replacements of Mattel products. An unfavorable resolution of these pending matters could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s financial condition and its operations. Regardless of its outcome, litigation may result in substantial costs and expenses, and significantly divert the attention of management. There can be no assurance that Mattel will be able to prevail in, or achieve a favorable settlement of, pending matters. In addition to the pending matters, future litigation, government proceedings, labor disputes, or environmental matters could lead to increased costs or interruption of Mattel’s normal business operations.

Mattel is subject to various laws and government regulations, violation of which could subject it to sanctions. In addition, changes in such laws or regulations may lead to increased costs, changes in Mattel’s effective tax rate, or the interruption of normal business operations that would negatively impact Mattel’s financial condition and results of operations.

Mattel operates in a highly regulated environment in the US and international markets. US federal, state and local governmental entities, and foreign governments regulate many aspects of Mattel’s business, including its products and the importation and exportation of its products. These regulations may include accounting standards, taxation requirements (including changes in applicable income tax rates, new tax laws and revised tax law interpretations), product safety and other safety standards, trade restrictions, regulations regarding financial matters, environmental regulations, advertising directed toward children, product content, and other administrative and regulatory restrictions. While Mattel takes all the steps it believes are necessary to comply with these laws and regulations, there can be no assurance that Mattel will be in compliance in the future. Failure to comply could result in monetary liabilities and other sanctions which could have a negative impact on Mattel’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, changes in laws or regulations may lead to increased costs, changes in Mattel’s effective tax rate, or the interruption of normal business operations that would negatively impact its financial condition and results of operations.

Product recalls, product liability claims, absence or cost of insurance, and associated costs could increase governmental scrutiny, divert resources, reduce sales and increase costs and could have a significant adverse effect on Mattel’s financial condition.

Mattel has experienced, and may in the future experience, issues in products that result in recalls, withdrawals, or replacements of products. Testing implemented by Mattel, as well as scrutiny by retailers, consumers, and other parties, may reveal issues in Mattel products that may lead to recalls, withdrawals, replacement of products, or regulatory actions by governmental authorities. In addition, individuals have asserted claims, and may in the future assert claims, that they have sustained injuries from Mattel’s products, and Mattel is and may be subject to lawsuits relating to these claims. There is a risk that these claims or liabilities may exceed, or fall outside of the scope of, Mattel’s insurance coverage. Moreover, Mattel may be unable to obtain adequate liability insurance in the future. Any of the issues mentioned above could result in increased governmental scrutiny, diversion of development and management resources, and reduced sales and increased costs, any of which could significantly and adversely affect Mattel’s financial condition.

Product recalls may harm Mattel’s reputation and acceptance of Mattel’s products by consumers, licensors and Mattel’s retailer customers, which may significantly and adversely affect its business operations, decrease sales and increase costs. Recalls may also increase competitive pressures from other toy manufacturers.

Product recalls, withdrawals, or replacements have resulted in coverage critical of Mattel in the press and media. While Mattel believes that it has acted responsibly and in the interests of safety, product recalls, withdrawals, or replacements may harm Mattel’s reputation and the acceptance of its products by consumers, licensors, and retailers. Mattel’s ability to enter into licensing agreements for products on competitive terms may be adversely affected if licensors believe that products sold by Mattel will be less favorably received in the market. Mattel’s retailer customers may be less willing to purchase Mattel products or to provide marketing support for those products, such as shelf space, promotions, and advertising, or have imposed or may impose additional requirements or product changes that would adversely affect Mattel’s business operations, decrease sales, and increase costs. Product recalls, withdrawals, or replacements may also increase the amount of competition that Mattel confronts from other manufacturers. Some competitors may attempt to differentiate themselves from Mattel by claiming that their products are produced in a manner or geographic area that is insulated from the issues that preceded recalls, withdrawals, or replacements of Mattel products. To the extent that competitive manufacturers choose not to implement enhanced safety and testing protocols comparable to those that Mattel has adopted, those competitors could enjoy a cost advantage that will enable them to offer products at lower prices than those charged by Mattel.

Mattel’s current and future safety procedures may increase costs, significantly and adversely affect its relationship with vendors and make it more difficult for Mattel to produce, purchase and deliver products on a timely basis to meet market demands. Future conditions may require Mattel to adopt further changes that may increase its costs and further affect its relationship with vendors.

Mattel’s current operating procedures and requirements, including testing requirements and standards, have imposed costs on both Mattel and the vendors from which it purchases products. Changes in business conditions, including those resulting from new legislative and regulatory requirements, will cause further revisions in Mattel’s operating procedures and requirements. Changes in Mattel’s operating procedures and requirements may delay delivery of products and increase costs. Mattel’s relationship with its existing vendors may be adversely affected as a result of these changes, making Mattel more dependent on a smaller number of vendors. Some vendors may choose not to continue to do business with Mattel or not to accommodate Mattel’s needs to

the extent that they have done in the past. In addition, rising production costs, contraction of credit availability and labor shortages have caused a substantial contraction in the number of toy manufacturers in China, decreasing the number of potential vendors to manufacture Mattel’s products. Because of the seasonal nature of Mattel’s business and the demands of its customers for deliveries with short lead times, Mattel depends upon the cooperation of its vendors to meet market demand for its products in a timely manner. There can be no assurance that existing and future events will not require Mattel to adopt additional requirements and incur additional costs, and impose those requirements and costs on its vendors, which may adversely affect its relationship with those vendors and Mattel’s ability to meet market demand in a timely manner.

Political developments, including trade relations, and the threat or occurrence of war or terrorist activities could adversely impact Mattel, its personnel and facilities, its customers and suppliers, retail and financial markets, and general economic conditions.

Mattel’s business is worldwide in scope, including operations in 43 countries and territories. The deterioration of the political situation in a country in which Mattel has significant sales or operations, or the breakdown of trade relations between the US and a foreign country in which Mattel has significant manufacturing facilities or other operations, could adversely affect Mattel’s business, financial condition, and results of operations. For example, a change in trade status for China could result in a substantial increase in the import duty of toys manufactured in China and imported into the US. In addition, the occurrence of war or hostilities between countries or threat of terrorist activities, and the responses to and results of these activities, could adversely impact Mattel, its personnel and facilities, its customers and suppliers, retail and financial markets, and general economic conditions.

Disruptions in Mattel’s manufacturing operations due to political instability, civil unrest, or disease could negatively impact Mattel’s business, financial position and results of operations.

Mattel owns, operates and manages manufacturing facilities and utilizes third-party manufacturers throughout Asia, primarily in China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. The risk of political instability and civil unrest exists in certain of these countries, which could temporarily or permanently damage Mattel’s manufacturing operations located there. In the past, outbreaks of SARS have been significantly concentrated in Asia, particularly in Hong Kong, and in the Guangdong province of China, where many of Mattel’s manufacturing facilities and third-party manufacturers are located. The design, development and manufacture of Mattel’s products could suffer if a significant number of Mattel’s employees or the employees of its third-party manufacturers or their suppliers contract SARS, avian flu or other communicable diseases, or otherwise are unable to fulfill their responsibilities. Mattel has developed contingency plans designed to help mitigate the impact of disruptions in its manufacturing operations. Mattel’s business, financial position, and results of operations could be negatively impacted by a significant disruption to its manufacturing operations or suppliers.

Earthquakes or other catastrophic events out of our control may damage Mattel’s facilities or those of its contractors and harm Mattel’s results of operations.

Mattel has significant operations near major earthquake faults, including its corporate headquarters in Southern California. A catastrophic event where Mattel has important operations, such as an earthquake, tsunami, flood, typhoon, fire, or other natural or manmade disaster, could disrupt Mattel’s operations or those of its contractors and impair production or distribution of its products, damage inventory, interrupt critical functions, or otherwise affect its business negatively, harming Mattel’s results of operations.

The production and sale of private-label toys by Mattel’s retail customers may result in lower purchases of Mattel-branded products by those retail customers.

In recent years, consumer goods companies generally, including those in the toy business, have experienced the phenomenon of retail customers developing their own private-label products that directly compete with the

products of traditional manufacturers. Some retail chains that are customers of Mattel sell private-label toys designed, manufactured and branded by the retailers themselves. These toys may be sold at prices lower than comparable toys sold by Mattel and may result in lower purchases of Mattel-branded products by these retailers. In some cases, retailers who sell these private-label toys are larger than Mattel and may have substantially more resources than Mattel.

Mattel’s failure to successfully market or advertise its products could have an adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Mattel’s products are marketed worldwide through a diverse spectrum of advertising and promotional programs. Mattel’s ability to sell products is dependent in part upon the success of these programs. If Mattel does not successfully market its products or if media or other advertising or promotional costs increase, these factors could have an adverse effect on Mattel’s business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Mattel depends on key personnel and may not be able to hire, retain and integrate sufficient qualified personnel to maintain and expand its business.

Mattel’s future success depends partly on the continued contribution of key executives, designers, technical, sales, marketing, manufacturing, and administrative personnel. The loss of services of any of Mattel’s key personnel could harm Mattel’s business. Recruiting and retaining skilled personnel is costly and highly competitive. If Mattel fails to retain, hire, train, and integrate qualified employees and contractors, Mattel may not be able to maintain and expand its business.

Mattel may engage in acquisitions, mergers or dispositions, which may affect the profit, revenues, profit margins, debt-to-capital ratio, capital expenditures or other aspects of Mattel’s business. In addition, Mattel has certain anti-takeover provisions in its by-laws that may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire Mattel without its consent, which may adversely affect Mattel’s stock price.

Mattel may engage in acquisitions, mergers or dispositions, which may affect the profit, revenues, profit margins, debt-to-capital ratio, capital expenditures, or other aspects of Mattel’s business. There can be no assurance that Mattel will be able to identify suitable acquisition targets or merger partners or that, if identified, it will be able to acquire these targets on acceptable terms or agree to terms with merger partners. There can also be no assurance that Mattel will be successful in integrating any acquired company into its overall operations, or that any such acquired company will operate profitably or will not otherwise adversely impact Mattel’s results of operations. Further, Mattel cannot be certain that key talented individuals at these acquired companies will continue to work for Mattel after the acquisition or that they will continue to develop popular and profitable products or services. In addition, Mattel has certain anti-takeover provisions in its bylaws that may make it more difficult for a third party to acquire Mattel without its consent, which may adversely affect Mattel’s stock price.

The level of returns on pension plan assets and the actuarial assumptions used for valuation purposes could affect our earnings in future periods. Changes in standards and government regulations could also affect our pension plan expense and funding requirements.

Assumptions used in determining projected benefit obligations and the fair value of plan assets for our pension plan are evaluated by us in consultation with outside actuaries. In the event that we determine that changes are warranted in the assumptions used, such as the discount rate, expected long term rate of return, or health care costs, our future pension benefit expenses could increase or decrease. Due to changing market conditions or changes in the participant population, the actuarial assumptions that we use may differ from actual results, which could have a significant impact on our pension and postretirement liability and related costs. Funding obligations are determined based on the value of assets and liabilities on a specific date as required under relevant government regulations for each plan. Future pension funding requirements, and the timing of funding payments, could be affected by legislation enacted by the relevant governmental authorities.

If any of the risks and uncertainties described in the cautionary factors listed above actually occurs, Mattel’s business, financial condition and results of operations could be significantly and adversely affected. The factors listed above are not exhaustive. Other sections of this Annual Report on Form 10-K include additional factors that could materially and adversely impact Mattel’s business, financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, Mattel operates in a very competitive and rapidly changing environment. New factors emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict the impact of all of these factors on Mattel’s business, financial condition or results of operations, or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements. Given these risks and uncertainties, investors should not rely on forward-looking statements as a prediction of actual results. Any or all of the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and any other public statement made by Mattel or its representatives may turn out to be wrong. Mattel expressly disclaims any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new developments or otherwise.

Mattel owns its corporate headquarters in El Segundo, California, consisting of approximately 335,000 square feet, and an adjacent office building consisting of approximately 55,000 square feet. Mattel also leases buildings in El Segundo consisting of approximately 327,000 square feet. All segments use these facilities. Mattel’s Fisher-Price^® subsidiary owns its headquarters facilities in East Aurora, New York, consisting of approximately 535,000 square feet, which is used by the Fisher-Price Brands US segment and for corporate support functions. American Girl Brands owns its headquarters facilities in Middleton, Wisconsin, consisting of approximately 180,000 square feet, a warehouse in Middleton, consisting of approximately 215,000 square feet, and distribution facilities in Middleton, DeForest and Wilmot, Wisconsin, consisting of a total of approximately 948,000 square feet, all of which are used by the American Girl Brands segment.

Mattel maintains leased sales offices in California, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, and Arkansas, and leased warehouse and distribution facilities in California, New Jersey, and Texas, all of which are used by the Domestic segment. Mattel has leased retail and related office space in Chicago, Illinois, New York, New York, and Los Angeles, California for its American Girl Place^® stores, Dallas, Texas, Atlanta, Georgia, Natick, Massachusetts, Bloomington, Minnesota, and Denver, Colorado for its American Girl Boutique and Bistro^® and leased retail space in Oshkosh, Wisconsin, which are used by the American Girl Brands segment, and Pomona, California, which is used by Mattel Brands. Mattel also has leased office space in Florida, which is used by the International segment. Mattel leases a computer facility in Phoenix, Arizona used by all segments. Internationally, Mattel has offices and/or warehouse space in Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bermuda, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Colombia, Costa Rica, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Hungary, India, Italy, Japan, Macau, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Peru, Poland, Portugal, Puerto Rico, South Korea, Spain, Switzerland, Taiwan, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and Venezuela, which are leased (with the exception of office and warehouse space in Chile and certain warehouse space in France that is owned by Mattel) and used by the International segment. Mattel also has leased retail and related office space in China. Mattel’s principal manufacturing facilities are located in China, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, and Mexico. See Item 1 “Business—Manufacturing and Materials.”

For leases that are scheduled to expire during the next twelve months, Mattel may negotiate new lease agreements, renew existing lease agreements, or utilize alternate facilities. See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Commitments and Contingencies.” Mattel believes that its owned and leased facilities, in general, are suitable and adequate for its present and currently foreseeable needs.

See Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Litigation” and Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Commitments and Contingencies.”

No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of the fiscal year covered by this report.

For information regarding the markets in which Mattel’s common stock, par value $1.00 per share, is traded, see the cover page hereof. For information regarding the high and low closing prices of Mattel’s common stock for the last two calendar years, see Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Quarterly Financial Information.”

As of February 22, 2010, Mattel had approximately 36,000 holders of record of its common stock.

In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Mattel paid a dividend per share of $0.75 to holders of its common stock. The Board of Directors declared the dividends in November, and Mattel paid the dividends in December of each year. The payment of dividends on common stock is at the discretion of the Board of Directors and is subject to customary limitations.

During the fourth quarter of 2009, Mattel did not sell any unregistered securities.

During 2009, Mattel did not repurchase any shares of its common stock. During 2008, Mattel repurchased 4.9 million shares at a cost of $90.6 million. During 2007, Mattel repurchased 35.9 million shares at a cost of $806.3 million. During 2008 and 2007, the Board of Directors authorized Mattel to increase its share repurchase program by $500.0 million and $750.0 million, respectively. At December 31, 2009, share repurchase authorizations of $410.3 million had not been executed. Repurchases will take place from time to time, depending on market conditions. Mattel’s share repurchase program has no expiration date.

This table provides certain information with respect to Mattel’s purchases of its common stock during the fourth quarter of 2009:

The following graph compares the performance of Mattel common stock with that of the S&P 500 Index and the S&P 500 Consumer Staples Index. The Cumulative Total Return listed below assumes an initial investment of $100 on December 31, 2004 and reinvestment of dividends.

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements and the related notes. See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

Mattel’s objective is to continue to create long-term stockholder value by generating strong cash flow and deploying it in a disciplined and opportunistic manner as outlined in Mattel’s capital and investment framework. To achieve this objective, management has established three overarching goals.

The first goal is to grow core brands by continuing to develop popular toys that are innovative and responsive to current play patterns and other trends. Additionally, Mattel plans to pursue additional licensing arrangements and strategic partnerships to extend its portfolio of brands into areas outside of traditional toys.

The second goal is to improve execution in areas including manufacturing, distribution, and selling. Mattel continues to focus on improving the efficiency of its supply chain using Lean supply chain initiatives. The objective of the Lean program is to improve the flow of processes, do more with less, and focus on the value chain from beginning to end.

The third goal is to further capitalize on Mattel’s scale advantage. For example, as the world’s largest toy company, Mattel believes it can realize cost savings when making purchasing decisions based on a One Mattel philosophy.

During 2009, Mattel improved execution across its supply chain and throughout the company by realigning its infrastructure, controlling costs and expenses, tightly managing working capital, especially inventories, and reducing capital spending by doing only business-critical projects. This resulted in improved profitability, a stronger balance sheet, and improved cash flow, which Mattel used to lower debt, increase cash balances, and continue to reward stockholders through its strong annual dividend. More specifically:

Mattel’s focus for 2010 is to build on its progress towards its long-term profitability goals, in light of what it expects to be a challenging cost environment and a continuation of a difficult economic environment. Over the long-term, Mattel’s goals are to achieve gross margin of approximately 50%, advertising expense of approximately 11% to 13%, and other selling and administrative expenses of approximately 20%, which should result in operating margins of approximately 15% to 20%. Mattel will continue to manage its business based on

realistic revenue assumptions, but is more optimistic about its revenue in 2010 based on the momentum of its core brands from 2009, strong partnerships for licensed brands in 2010, including WWE^® Wrestling, Disney/Pixar’s Toy Story^®, and HIT Entertainment™’s Thomas and Friends^®, and its evergreen licensed properties. In addition to its revenue generating activities, Mattel will also continue to take actions intended to improve profitability, including:

Net sales for 2009 were $5.43 billion, an 8% decrease as compared to $5.92 billion in 2008, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 2 percentage points. Net income for 2009 was $528.7 million, or $1.45 per diluted share as compared to net income of $379.6 million, or $1.04 per diluted share, for 2008. Net income for 2009 was positively impacted by net tax benefits of $28.8 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of current audits in various jurisdictions around the world, settlements, and enacted tax law changes.

Gross profit as a percentage of net sales increased to 50.0% in 2009 from 45.4% in 2008. The increase in gross profit as a percentage of net sales was primarily due to price increases and net cost savings related to the Global Cost Leadership program, partially offset by unfavorable changes in foreign exchange rates.

Income before income taxes as a percentage of net sales increased to 12.2% in 2009 from 8.2% in 2008. Contributing to this increase were higher gross profit and lower advertising and promotion expenses, partially offset by higher other selling and administrative expenses.

The following table provides a summary of Mattel’s consolidated results for 2009 and 2008 (in millions, except percentage and basis point information):

Net sales for 2009 were $5.43 billion, an 8% decrease as compared to $5.92 billion in 2008, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 2 percentage points. Gross sales within the US decreased 4% from 2008, and accounted for 54% and 51% of consolidated gross sales in 2009 and 2008, respectively. Gross sales in international markets decreased 13% as compared to 2008, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points.

Worldwide gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 10% to $3.29 billion in 2009 as compared to 2008, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 3 percentage points. Domestic gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 2% and international gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 15%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Worldwide gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 3%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 3 percentage points. Domestic gross sales of Barbie^® increased 4% and international gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 6%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Worldwide gross sales of Other Girls Brands decreased 20%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 2 percentage points, driven primarily by sales declines in High School Musical^® products. Worldwide gross sales of Wheels products decreased 7%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 3 percentage points, primarily due to sales declines in Speed Racer^® and Tyco R/C^® products, partially offset by higher sales of Core Hot Wheels^® and Matchbox^® products. Worldwide gross sales of Entertainment products decreased by 14%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 2 percentage points, driven primarily by sales declines in Radica^® products and products tied to last year’s three key summer movie properties: Batman^®, Speed Racer^®, and Kung Fu Panda^®, partially offset by sales of products tied to Toy Story^® and Toy Story^® 2, and higher sales of CARS™ products domestically.

Worldwide gross sales of Fisher-Price Brands decreased 8% to $2.17 billion in 2009 as compared to 2008, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 1 percentage point. Domestic gross sales of Fisher-Price Brands decreased 8% and international gross sales decreased 9%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Worldwide gross sales of Core Fisher-Price^® decreased 6%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 1 percentage point. Domestic gross sales of Core Fisher-Price^® decreased 4% and international gross sales decreased 9%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Worldwide gross sales of Fisher-Price^® Friends decreased 13%, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates. Domestic gross sales of Fisher-Price^® Friends decreased 18% and international gross sales decreased 5%, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates.

Cost of sales decreased by $517.4 million, or 16%, from $3.23 billion in 2008 to $2.72 billion in 2009 as compared to an 8% decrease in net sales. On an overall basis, cost of sales decreased from 2008 primarily due to lower sales volume, cost savings from Mattel’s Global Cost Leadership program, and lower input costs. Within cost of sales, product costs decreased by $366.5 million, or 14%, from $2.60 billion in 2008 to $2.23 billion in 2009; freight and logistics expenses decreased by $98.2 million, or 25%, which included net cost savings from the Global Cost Leadership program, from $394.1 million in 2008 to $295.9 million in 2009; and royalty expense decreased $52.7 million, or 22%, from $241.2 million in 2008 to $188.5 million in 2009.

Gross profit as a percentage of net sales increased from 45.4% in 2008 to 50.0% in 2009. The increase in gross profit as a percentage of net sales was primarily driven by price increases and net cost savings related to the Global Cost Leadership program, partially offset by unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates.

Advertising and promotion expenses decreased to 11.2% of net sales in 2009, from 12.2% of net sales in 2008, due primarily to lower than expected sales volume in 2008 and savings of approximately $14 million related to Mattel’s Global Cost Leadership program.

Other selling and administrative expenses were $1.37 billion in 2009, or 25.3% of net sales in 2009 as compared to $1.42 billion in 2008, or 24.1% of net sales. The dollar decrease in other selling and administrative expenses was primarily due to incremental year-over-year savings related to the Global Cost Leadership program (approximately $88 million in gross savings along with approximately $3 million of lower severance in 2009), the impact of foreign currency exchange benefits, and lower litigation and legal settlement-related costs of approximately $27 million, partially offset by higher incentive compensation expense of approximately $81 million and higher equity compensation expense of approximately $14 million.

Interest expense was $71.8 million in 2009 as compared to $81.9 million in 2008, due primarily to lower average borrowings and lower average interest rates. Interest income decreased from $25.0 million in 2008 to $8.1 million in 2009 due to lower average interest rates on lower average cash balances. Other non-operating expense was $7.4 million in 2009 as compared to other non-operating income of $3.1 million in 2008. The change in other non-operating income/expense relates primarily to foreign currency exchange gains and losses, largely caused by revaluations of US dollar cash balances held by Mattel’s Venezuelan subsidiary.

Mattel’s effective tax rate on income before income taxes in 2009 was 19.9% as compared to 22.2% in 2008. The 2009 income tax provision includes net tax benefits of $28.8 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of current audits in various jurisdictions around the world, settlements, and enacted law changes.

Mattel’s operating segments are separately managed business units and are divided on a geographic basis between domestic and international. The Domestic segment is further divided into Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US, Fisher-Price Brands US and American Girl Brands. Operating segment results should be read in conjunction with Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Segment Information.”

Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US gross sales decreased 2% in 2009 as compared to 2008. Within this segment, gross sales of Barbie^® increased 4% and gross sales of Other Girls Brands decreased 11%, primarily driven by lower sales of High School Musical^® products. Gross sales of Wheels products increased 1%, primarily due to higher sales of Core Hot Wheels^® and Matchbox^® products, partially offset by sales declines in Speed Racer^® and Tyco R/C^® products. Gross sales of Entertainment products decreased 7%, primarily driven by lower sales of Radica^® products and products tied to last year’s three key summer movie properties: Batman^®, Speed Racer^®, and Kung Fu Panda^®, partially offset by sales of products tied to Toy Story^® and Toy Story^® 2 and higher sales of CARS™ products. Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US segment income increased 85% to $293.4 million in 2009 from $158.2 million in 2008, primarily driven by higher gross profit and lower other selling and administrative expenses.

Fisher-Price Brands US gross sales decreased 8% in 2009 as compared to 2008. Within this segment, gross sales of Core Fisher-Price^® products decreased 4% and gross sales of Fisher-Price^® Friends products decreased 18%. Fisher-Price Brands US segment income increased 44% to $231.9 million in 2009 from $161.0 million in 2008, primarily driven by higher gross profit, lower other selling and administrative expenses, and lower advertising and promotion expenses, partially offset by lower sales volume.

American Girl Brands gross sales were flat during 2009 as compared to 2008, driven primarily by the November 2008 openings of the American Girl Boutique and Bistro^® in Boston and Minneapolis, offset by softness resulting primarily from a difficult comparison to strong entertainment-related sales in 2008. American Girl Brands segment operating income increased 19% to $103.4 million in 2009 from $86.6 million in 2008, primarily driven by higher gross profit, lower other selling and administrative expenses, and lower advertising and promotion expenses.

The following table provides a summary of percentage changes in gross sales within the International segment in 2009 versus 2008:

International gross sales decreased 13% in 2009 as compared to 2008, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 15%, including unfavorable change in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 6%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Gross sales of Other Girls Brands decreased 26%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 3 percentage points, driven primarily by sales declines in High School Musical^® products. Gross sales of Wheels products decreased 13%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 5 percentage points driven primarily by sales declines in Speed Racer^® and Tyco R/C^® products. Gross sales of Entertainment products decreased by 19%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points, driven primarily by lower sales of products tied to last year’s three key summer movie properties: Batman^®, Speed Racer^®, and Kung Fu Panda^®, along with CARS™ products, and Radica^® products, partially offset by sales of products tied to Toy Story^® and Toy Story^® 2. Fisher-Price Brands gross sales decreased 9%, including unfavorable changes in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points. Gross sales of Core Fisher-Price^® products decreased 9%, including unfavorable change in currency exchange rates of 4 percentage points and gross sales of Fisher-Price^® Friends products decreased 5%, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates. International segment income increased 18% to $422.5 million in 2009 from $357.6 million in 2008, primarily driven by higher gross margin, lower advertising and promotion expenses, and lower other selling and administrative expenses, partially offset by lower sales volume.

Net sales for 2008 were $5.92 billion, a 1% decrease as compared to $5.97 billion in 2007, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates. Net income for 2008 was $379.6 million, or $1.04 per diluted share, as compared to net income of $600.0 million, or $1.53 per diluted share, for 2007. Net income for 2007 was

positively impacted by net tax benefits of $42.0 million as a result of reassessments of tax exposures based on the status of current audits in various jurisdictions around the world, including settlements, partially offset by enacted tax law changes.

Gross profit, as a percentage of net sales, decreased to 45.4% in 2008 from 46.5% in 2007. The decrease in gross profit was primarily due to higher product costs driven by higher commodities, labor, and product testing costs, along with appreciating Asian currencies (collectively, “input costs”), higher costs of distribution, and mix, partially offset by the benefit of price increases, favorable changes in currency exchange rates, and lower product recall costs as compared to 2007.

Income before income taxes as a percentage of net sales declined to 8.2% in 2008 from 11.8% in 2007. Contributing to this decline were lower gross margins, higher advertising and promotion expenses, and higher other selling and administrative expenses, which were all impacted by lower sales. The increase in other selling and administrative expense in 2008 was primarily due to incremental legal and settlement related costs of approximately $52 million, the impact of foreign exchange rates, and higher bad debt expense. Additionally, interest expense increased in 2008 due to higher average borrowings, partially offset by lower average interest rates and interest income decreased in 2008 due to lower average interest rates, partially offset by higher average invested cash balances.

The following table provides a summary of Mattel’s consolidated results for 2008 and 2007 (in millions, except percentage and basis point information):

Net sales for 2008 were $5.92 billion, a 1% decrease as compared to $5.97 billion in 2007, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates. Gross sales within the US decreased 2% from 2007, and accounted for 51% of consolidated gross sales in both 2008 and 2007. Gross sales in international markets decreased 1% as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates.

Worldwide gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 2% to $3.64 billion in 2008 as compared to 2007, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates. Domestic gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 1% and international gross sales of Mattel Girls & Boys Brands decreased 2%, including a 2 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates. Worldwide gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 9%, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates. Domestic gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 7%, primarily driven by sales declines in Barbie Girls^® MP3 Player and Barbie^® Collector products, partially offset by increased sales in Barbie^® Fantasy products. International gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 9%, including a 2 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by sales declines of Barbie^®

Fantasy, Barbie Girls^® MP3 Player, and My Scene^® products. Lower sales in Barbie^® Fantasy products in international markets were driven by the underperformance of toys associated with the 2008 Barbie^® entertainment property, Barbie & the Diamond Castle^®, as compared to the 2007 entertainment property, Barbie as the Island Princess^®. Worldwide gross sales of Other Girls Brands increased 11% from 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by higher sales of High School Musical^®, Little Mommy^®, and Hannah Montana^® internationally, partially offset by sales declines for Pixel Chix^® and Polly Pocket^®. Worldwide gross sales of Wheels products increased 4% as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily due to Speed Racer^® sales. Worldwide gross sales of Entertainment products, which includes games and puzzles and Radica^®, decreased by 4% as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by sales declines in CARS™, interactive games, and Radica^® products, partially offset by increased sales of products tied to the Batman^®: The Dark Knight^® movie property.

Worldwide gross sales of Fisher-Price Brands decreased 3% to $2.36 billion in 2008, as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates. Worldwide gross sales of Fisher-Price^® Friends decreased 16% as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point unfavorable change in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by sales declines in Dora the Explorer^® and Sesame Street^® products as compared to strong levels in the prior year, partially offset by growth in sales of Disney^® products. Worldwide gross sales of Core Fisher-Price^® increased 1% as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates.

Gross sales of American Girl Brands increased 7% to $463.1 million in 2008 as compared to 2007, primarily driven by strong sales of products tied to the Kit Kittredge^® movie and increased sales in the retail channel.

Cost of sales increased by $40.8 million, or 1%, from $3.19 billion in 2007 to $3.23 billion in 2008 as compared to a 1% decrease in net sales. On an overall basis, cost of sales increased primarily due to higher input costs and higher costs of distribution, partially offset by foreign currency exchanges benefits and lower product recall costs as compared to 2007. Within cost of sales, product costs increased by $27.8 million, or 1%, from $2.57 billion in 2007 to $2.60 billion in 2008. Royalty expense decreased by $2.1 million, or 1%, from $243.3 million in 2007 to $241.2 million in 2008. Freight and logistics expenses increased by $15.1 million, or 4%, from $379.0 million in 2007 to $394.1 million in 2008.

Gross profit, as a percentage of net sales, decreased to 45.4% in 2008 from 46.5% in 2007. The decrease in gross profit was primarily driven by higher input costs, higher costs of distribution, and mix, partially offset by the benefit of price increases, favorable changes in currency exchange rates, and lower product recall costs as compared to 2007.

Advertising and promotion expenses increased to 12.2% of net sales in 2008, from 11.9% in 2007 due primarily to lower than expected sales volume.

Other selling and administrative expenses were $1.42 billion in 2008, or 24.1% of net sales, as compared to $1.34 billion in 2007, or 22.4% of net sales. The increase in other selling and administrative expense in 2008 was primarily due to incremental legal and settlement related costs of approximately $52 million, the impact of

foreign exchange rates, and higher bad debt expense. Compensation expense related to stock options and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) totaled $35.7 million in 2008, as compared to $22.2 million in 2007.

Interest expense was $81.9 million in 2008, as compared to $71.0 million in 2007, due to higher average borrowings, partially offset by lower average interest rates. Interest income decreased from $33.3 million in 2007 to $25.0 million in 2008 due to lower average interest rates, partially offset by higher average invested cash balances. Other non-operating income was $3.1 million in 2008 and primarily related to foreign currency exchange gains caused by local currency revaluation of US dollar cash balances held by a Latin American subsidiary, partially offset by a $4.0 million investment impairment charge recorded during the third quarter of 2008. Other non-operating income was $11.0 million in 2007 and primarily related to foreign currency exchange gains caused by local currency revaluations of the US dollar cash balances held by a Latin American subsidiary.

Mattel’s effective tax rate on income before income taxes in 2008 was 22.2% as compared to 14.7% in 2007. The 2007 income tax provision includes net benefits of $42.0 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of audits in various jurisdictions around the world, including settlements, partially offset by enacted tax law changes.

Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US gross sales decreased 1% in 2008 as compared to 2007. Within this segment, gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 7%, primarily driven by sales declines of Barbie Girls^® MP3 Player and Barbie^® Collector products, partially offset by increased sales of Barbie^® Fantasy products. Gross sales of Other Girls Brands increased 13%, primarily driven by higher sales of High School Musical^®, partially offset by sales declines for Polly Pocket^® and Pixel Chix^®. Gross sales of Wheels products increased 11%, primarily due to Speed Racer^® sales. Gross sales in Entertainment products, which include games and puzzles and Radica^® , decreased 10%, primarily driven by sale declines in CARS™, Radica^®, and interactive games products, partially offset by increased sales of products tied to the Batman^®: The Dark Knight^® movie property. Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US segment income decreased 25% to $158.2 million in 2008, primarily due to lower gross profit driven by higher input costs, higher costs of distribution, and mix, partially offset by the benefit of price increases and lower product recall costs as compared to 2007.

Fisher-Price Brands US gross sales decreased 6%, reflecting sales declines of Fisher-Price^® Friends, primarily driven by lower sales of Dora the Explorer^® and Sesame Street^® as compared to strong levels in the prior year, partially offset by growth in sales of Disney^® products, and Core Fisher-Price^® products. Fisher-Price Brands US segment income decreased 29% to $161.0 million in 2008, primarily due to lower gross profit driven by higher input costs, higher costs of distribution, and mix, partially offset by the benefit of price increases and lower product recall costs as compared to 2007, and higher advertising and promotion expenses due primarily to lower than expected sales volumes.

American Girl Brands gross sales increased 7% from the prior year, primarily driven by strong sales of products tied to the Kit Kittredge^® movie and increased sales in the retail channel. American Girl Brands segment operating income decreased 12% to $86.6 million in 2008, primarily due to higher other selling and administrative expenses related to retail pre-opening costs, partially offset by higher sales volume.

The following table provides a summary of percentage changes in gross sales within the International segment in 2008 versus 2007:

International gross sales decreased 1% in 2008 as compared to 2007, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates. Gross sales of Barbie^® decreased 9%, including a 2 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by sales declines in Barbie^® Fantasy, Barbie Girls^® MP3 Player, and My Scene^® products. Lower sales in Barbie^® Fantasy products was driven by the underperformance of toys associated with the 2008 Barbie^® entertainment property, Barbie & the Diamond Castle^®, as compared to the 2007 entertainment property, Barbie as the Island Princess^®. Gross sales of Other Girls Brands increased 10%, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily due to sales of High School Musical^® and Hanna Montana^® products and higher sales of Little Mommy^® , partially offset by sales declines for Pixel Chix^® and Polly Pocket^®. Gross sales of Wheels products decreased 2%, including a 2 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates. Gross sales of Entertainment products increased by 1%, including a 1 percentage point benefit from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by sales of products tied to the Batman^®: The Dark Knight^®, Speed Racer^®, and Kung Fu Panda^® movie properties. Fisher-Price Brands gross sales increased 1%, with no impact from changes in currency exchange rates, primarily driven by strong sales of Core Fisher-Price^® products, partially offset by sales declines of Fisher-Price^® Friends products. International segment income decreased 15% to $357.6 million in 2008, primarily due to lower gross profit driven by higher input costs, higher costs of distribution, and mix, partially offset by the benefit of price increases, favorable changes in currency exchange rates, and lower product recall costs as compared to 2007, and higher other selling and administrative expenses.

During the middle of 2008, Mattel initiated its Global Cost Leadership program, which is designed to improve operating efficiencies and leverage Mattel’s global scale to improve profitability and operating cash flows. The major initiatives within Mattel’s Global Cost Leadership program include:

Mattel’s Global Cost Leadership program is intended to generate approximately $180 million to $200 million of cumulative net cost savings by the end of 2010. Mattel exceeded its 2009 goal of generating approximately $90 million to $100 million of net cost savings by realizing approximately $164 million of gross cost savings before severance charges of approximately $32 million (or $132 million in net cost savings). Of the gross cost savings in 2009, approximately $88 million is reflected within other selling and administrative expenses, approximately $62 million within gross profit, and approximately $14 million within advertising and promotion expenses. During 2008, Mattel recorded severance and other termination-related charges of approximately $34 million. Mattel expects to meet its 2010 goal of approximately $180 million to $200 million of cumulative net cost savings.

Mattel’s effective tax rate on income before income taxes in 2009 was 19.9% as compared to 22.2% in 2008. The 2009 income tax provision includes net benefits of $28.8 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of current audits in various jurisdictions around the world, settlements, and enacted tax law changes.

Mattel’s primary sources of liquidity are its cash and equivalents balances, access to short-term borrowing facilities, including its $1.08 billion domestic unsecured committed revolving credit facility, and issuances of long-term debt securities. Cash flows from operating activities could be negatively impacted by decreased demand for Mattel’s products, which could result from factors such as adverse economic conditions and changes in public and consumer preferences, or by increased costs associated with manufacturing and distribution of products or shortages in raw materials or component parts. Additionally, Mattel’s ability to issue long-term debt and obtain seasonal financing could be adversely affected by factors such as the current global economic crisis and tight credit environment, an inability to meet its debt covenant requirements, which include maintaining consolidated debt-to-earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization and interest coverage ratios, or a deterioration of Mattel’s credit ratings. Mattel’s ability to conduct its operations could be negatively impacted should these or other adverse conditions affect its primary sources of liquidity.

Mattel is exposed to financial market risk resulting from changes in interest and foreign currency rates, and recent developments in the financial markets have increased Mattel’s exposure to the possible liquidity and credit risks of its counterparties. Mattel believes that it has ample liquidity to fund its business needs, including beginning of the year cash and equivalents, cash flows from operations, and access to its $1.08 billion domestic unsecured committed revolving credit facility, which it uses for seasonal working capital requirements. Mattel’s domestic credit facility was amended and restated effective March 23, 2009 and expires on March 23, 2012, as more fully described in Item 8 “Financial Statements Supplementary Data—Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Seasonal Financing and Debt.” As of December 31, 2009, Mattel had available incremental borrowing resources totaling approximately $780 million under this unsecured committed revolving credit facility, and Mattel has not experienced any limitations on its ability to access this source of liquidity. Market conditions could affect certain terms of other debt instruments that Mattel enters into from time to time.

Mattel monitors the third-party depository institutions that hold the company’s cash and equivalents. Mattel’s emphasis is primarily on safety and liquidity of principal and secondarily on maximizing the yield on

those funds. Mattel diversifies its cash and equivalents among counterparties and securities to minimize exposure. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, Mattel had a money market investment fund with an original cost basis of $85.3 million, which was classified within other current assets as a result of the money market investment fund halting redemption requests during 2008. During 2009 and 2008, Mattel recorded impairment charges of approximately $1 million and $4 million, respectively, associated with this investment. Additionally, during 2009, Mattel received cash proceeds of approximately $73 million related to this investment, and expects to receive the remaining proceeds, net of the impairment charges, during 2010. As of December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, Mattel had additional long-term investments of $35.0 million.

Mattel is subject to credit risks relating to the ability of counterparties of hedging transactions to meet their contractual payment obligations. The risks related to creditworthiness and nonperformance have been considered in the fair value measurements of Mattel’s foreign currency forward exchange contracts. Mattel continues to closely monitor its counterparties and will take action, as appropriate, to further manage its counterparty credit risk.

Mattel expects that some of its customers and vendors may experience difficulty in obtaining the liquidity required to buy inventory or raw materials. Mattel monitors its customers’ financial condition and their liquidity in order to mitigate Mattel’s accounts receivable collectibility risks and customer terms and credit limits are adjusted, if necessary. Additionally, Mattel uses a variety of financial arrangements to ensure collectibility of accounts receivable of customers deemed to be a credit risk, including requiring letters of credit, factoring or purchasing various forms of credit insurance with unrelated third parties, or requiring cash in advance of shipment.

Mattel sponsors defined benefit pension plans and postretirement benefit plans for employees of the company. Actual returns below the expected rate of return, along with changes in interest rates that affect the measurement of the liability, would impact the amount and timing of Mattel’s future contributions to these plans.

To guide future capital deployment decisions, with a goal of maximizing stockholder value, Mattel’s Board of Directors in 2003 established the following capital and investment framework:

Over the long term, assuming cash flows from operating activities remain strong, Mattel plans to use its free cash flows to invest in strategic acquisitions and to return funds to stockholders through cash dividends and share repurchases. Mattel’s share repurchase program has no expiration date and repurchases will take place from time to time, depending on market conditions. The ability to successfully implement the capital deployment plan is directly dependent on Mattel’s ability to generate strong cash flows from operating activities. There is no assurance that Mattel will continue to generate strong cash flows from operating activities or achieve its targeted goals for investing activities.

Cash flows generated from operating activities were $945.0 million during 2009 as compared to $436.3 million in 2008, and $560.5 million in 2007. The increase in cash flows from operating activities in 2009 from 2008 was primarily the result of higher profitability and lower working capital requirements, mainly due to lower levels of accounts receivable and inventories. The decrease in cash flows from operating activities in 2008 from 2007 was primarily the result of lower profitability, partially offset by lower working capital requirements, mainly due to lower usage of cash to reduce levels of accounts payable and accrued expenses.

Cash flows used for investing activities were $33.5 million during 2009, primarily due to the purchase of tools, dies, and molds and property, plant, and equipment, partially offset by proceeds received from the sale of investments. Cash flows used for investing activities were lower in 2009 as compared to 2008 mainly due to lower purchases of property, plant, and equipment, an increase in other investments in 2008, of which the proceeds of the investments were received in 2009, and lower payments for businesses acquired. Cash flows used for investing activities were higher in 2008 as compared to 2007 mainly due to an increase in other investments and higher purchases of property, plant, and equipment and tools, dies, and molds, partially offset by lower payments for businesses acquired.

Cash flows used for financing activities decreased to $376.1 million in 2009 from $395.7 million in 2008 primarily as a result of lower share repurchases, tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements, and higher proceeds from the exercise of stock options, partially offset by higher net payments of borrowings. Cash flows used for financing activities decreased to $395.7 million in 2008 from $587.8 million in 2007 as a result of lower share repurchases, partially offset by lower net borrowings and lower proceeds from the exercise of stock options.

In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Mattel paid a dividend per share of $0.75 to holders of its common stock. The Board of Directors declared the dividends in November, and Mattel paid the dividends in December of each year. The dividend payments were $271.4 million, $268.9 million, and $272.3 million in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Seasonal Financing and Debt.”

Mattel’s cash and equivalents were $1.12 billion at December 31, 2009, an increase of $499.3 million from 2008. The increase was primarily driven by cash flows generated from operating activities of $945.0 million, primarily due to higher profitability and lower working capital requirements, proceeds received from the sale of investments of $73.1 million, and proceeds from the exercise of stock options of $30.9 million, partially offset by dividend payments of $271.4 million, net repayments of $148.7 million of borrowings, and $120.5 million of purchases of tools, dies, and molds, and other property, plant, and equipment.

Accounts receivable decreased $124.2 million from December 31, 2008 to $749.3 million at December 31, 2009, reflecting higher factored receivables and improved days of sales outstanding.

Inventories decreased $130.3 million from December 31, 2008 to $355.7 million at December 31, 2009, primarily driven by tight inventory management within the current economic environment and lower costs of producing inventory in 2009.

Accounts payable and accrued liabilities decreased $102.6 million from December 31, 2008 to $968.6 million at December 31, 2009, primarily due to the timing and amount of payments of accounts payable and various accrued liability balances, including receivable collections due bank related to the domestic receivable facility, freight, and royalty obligations, partially offset by an increase in accrued incentive compensation.

At December 31, 2009 and 2008, Mattel’s total short-term borrowings totaled $2.0 million and $0, respectively. The current portion of long-term debt decreased $100.0 million to $50.0 million at December 31, 2009 as compared to December 31, 2008 due to the repayments of $100.0 million of the 2006 Senior Notes and $50.0 million of Medium-term notes, partially offset by the reclassification of $50 million of Medium-term notes to current.

Total noncurrent long-term debt decreased $50.0 million at December 31, 2009 as compared to December 31, 2008, due to the reclassification of $50.0 million of Medium-term notes to current. Mattel expects to satisfy its future long-term capital needs through the generation of corporate earnings and issuance of long-term debt instruments, as needed. Other noncurrent liabilities decreased $59.2 million at December 31, 2009, as compared to December 31, 2008, due primarily to decreases in long-term defined benefit pension plan obligations and income taxes payable. Stockholders’ equity of $2.53 billion at December 31, 2009 increased by $413.9 million from December 31, 2008, primarily as a result of net income and favorable currency translation adjustments, partially offset by payment of the annual dividend on common stock in the fourth quarter of 2009.

Mattel’s debt-to-capital ratio, including short-term borrowings and the current portion of long-term debt, decreased to 22.9% at December 31, 2009 from 29.8% at December 31, 2008, due to the aforementioned increase in stockholders’ equity and decrease in debt. Mattel’s objective is to maintain a year-end debt-to-capital ratio of approximately 25%.

Mattel has no off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a current or future effect on its financial condition, revenues or expenses, results of operations, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources that is material to stockholders.

In the normal course of business, Mattel enters into debt agreements, contractual arrangements to obtain and protect Mattel’s right to create and market certain products, and for future purchases of goods and services to ensure availability and timely delivery. These arrangements include commitments for future inventory purchases and royalty payments pursuant to licensing agreements. Certain of these commitments routinely contain provisions for guarantees or minimum expenditures during the term of the contracts.

Liabilities for uncertain tax positions for which a cash tax payment is not expected to be made in the next twelve months are classified as other noncurrent liabilities. Due to the uncertainty about the periods in which examinations will be completed and limited information related to current audits, Mattel is not able to make reasonably reliable estimates of the periods in which cash settlements will occur with taxing authorities for the noncurrent liabilities.

The content of Note 14 (“Commitments and Contingencies—Litigation”) to the Consolidated Financial Statements of Mattel in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety in this Item 7.

A consolidated stockholder derivative action was filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court in California, captioned In re Mattel, Inc. Derivative Litigation, consolidating three derivative actions filed in September 2007 (the “Superior Court Action”), asserting claims ostensibly on behalf and for the benefit of Mattel. A second consolidated derivative action in US District Court, Central District of California, captioned In re Mattel, Inc. Derivative Litigation, consolidating three federal derivative actions filed in October 2007, asserting claims ostensibly on behalf and for the benefit of Mattel, was dismissed with prejudice by the federal court in August 2008.

The Superior Court Action alleged that past and present members of Mattel’s Board of Directors breached their fiduciary duties in connection with product safety and reporting practices allegedly related to Mattel’s product recalls during August and September 2007. Plaintiffs also sued certain executive officers of Mattel, and alleged that officers and current and former directors who sold stock during the first half of 2007 breached their fiduciary duties by selling while allegedly in possession of non-public information relating to alleged product defects. Defendants filed a demurrer to the complaint, which was sustained with leave to amend on December 22, 2008. Plaintiffs filed a First Amended Consolidated Complaint, to which Defendants again filed a

demurrer. The Court sustained the demurrer without leave to amend, and entered an order of dismissal of the action with prejudice on July 7, 2009. Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal on September 1, 2009. Pursuant to an agreement resolving the appeal, the appeal was dismissed on December 29, 2009. All stockholder derivative suits stemming from the 2007 product recalls are now resolved.

Inflation rates in the US and in major foreign countries where Mattel does business have not had a significant impact on its results of operations or financial position during 2009, 2008, or 2007. Mattel receives some protection from the impact of inflation from high turnover of inventories and its ability, under certain circumstances and at certain times, to pass on higher prices to its customers.

Mattel sponsors a 401(k) savings plan, the Mattel, Inc. Personal Investment Plan (the “Plan”), for its domestic employees. Contributions to the Plan include voluntary contributions by eligible employees and employer automatic and matching contributions by Mattel. The Plan allows employees to allocate both their voluntary contributions and their employer automatic and matching contributions to a variety of investment funds, including a fund that is fully invested in Mattel common stock (the “Mattel Stock Fund”). Employees are not required to allocate any of their Plan account balance to the Mattel Stock Fund, which allows employees to limit or eliminate their exposure to market changes in Mattel’s stock price. Furthermore, the Plan limits the percentage of the employee’s total account balance that may be allocated to the Mattel Stock Fund to 25%. Employees may generally reallocate their account balances on a daily basis. However, pursuant to Mattel’s insider trading policy, employees classified as insiders and restricted personnel under Mattel’s insider trading policy are limited to certain periods in which they may make allocations into or out of the Mattel Stock Fund.

Mattel makes certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses. The accounting policies and estimates described below are those Mattel considers most critical in preparing its consolidated financial statements. Management has discussed the development and selection of these critical accounting policies and estimates with the Audit Committee of its Board of Directors, and the Audit Committee has reviewed the disclosures included below. The following is a review of the accounting policies and estimates that include significant judgments made by management using information available at the time the estimates are made. As described below, however, these estimates could change materially if different information or assumptions were used instead.

Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements includes a summary of Mattel’s significant accounting policies, estimates, and methods used in the preparation of Mattel’s consolidated financial statements. In most instances, Mattel must use an accounting policy or method because it is the only policy or method permitted under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”

The allowance for doubtful accounts represents adjustments to customer trade accounts receivable for amounts deemed partially or entirely uncollectible. Management believes the accounting estimate related to the allowance for doubtful accounts is a “critical accounting estimate” because significant changes in the assumptions used to develop the estimate could materially affect key financial measures, including other selling and administrative expenses, net income, and accounts receivable. In addition, the allowance requires a high degree of judgment since it involves estimation of the impact of both current and future economic factors in relation to its customers’ ability to pay amounts owed to Mattel.

In recent years, the mass-market retail channel has experienced significant shifts in market share among competitors, causing some large retailers to experience liquidity problems. In addition, many of Mattel’s customers have been negatively impacted by worsening economic conditions. Certain of Mattel’s customers filed for bankruptcy in 2008, including KB Toys in the US and Woolworth’s in the UK, and the recent global economic crisis has adversely affected the financial position of other retailers. Mattel’s sales to customers are typically made on credit without collateral and are highly concentrated in the third and fourth quarters due to the cyclical nature of toy sales, which results in a substantial portion of trade receivables being collected during the latter half of the year and the first quarter of the following year. There is a risk that customers will not pay, or that payment may be delayed, because of bankruptcy or other factors beyond the control of Mattel. This could increase Mattel’s exposure to losses from bad debts.

A small number of customers account for a large share of Mattel’s net sales and accounts receivable. In 2009, Mattel’s three largest customers, Wal-Mart, Toys “R” Us, and Target, in the aggregate, accounted for approximately 40% of net sales, and its ten largest customers, in the aggregate, accounted for approximately 50% of net sales. As of December 31, 2009, Mattel’s three largest customers accounted for approximately 31% of net accounts receivable, and its ten largest customers accounted for approximately 44% of net accounts receivable. The concentration of Mattel’s business with a relatively small number of customers may expose Mattel to a material adverse effect if one or more of Mattel’s large customers were to experience financial difficulty.

Mattel has procedures to mitigate its risk of exposure to losses from bad debts. Revenue is recognized upon shipment or upon receipt of products by the customer, depending on the terms, provided that: there are no uncertainties regarding customer acceptance; persuasive evidence of an agreement exists documenting the specific terms of the transaction; the sales price is fixed or determinable; and collectibility is reasonably assured. Credit limits and payment terms are established based on the underlying criteria that collectibility must be reasonably assured at the levels set for each customer. Extensive evaluations are performed on an ongoing basis throughout the fiscal year of each customer’s financial performance, cash generation, financing availability and liquidity status. Customers are reviewed at least annually, with more frequent reviews being performed, if necessary, based on the customer’s financial condition and the level of credit being extended. For customers who are experiencing financial difficulties, management performs additional financial analyses prior to shipping to those customers on credit. Customer terms and credit limits are adjusted, if necessary, to reflect the results of the review. Mattel uses a variety of financial arrangements to ensure collectibility of accounts receivable of customers deemed to be a credit risk, including requiring letters of credit, factoring or purchasing various forms of credit insurance with unrelated third parties, or requiring cash in advance of shipment.

The following table summarizes Mattel’s allowance for doubtful accounts at December 31:

Mattel’s allowance for doubtful accounts is based on management’s assessment of the business environment, customers’ financial condition, historical collection experience, accounts receivable aging, and customer disputes. Changes in the allowance for doubtful accounts reflect management’s assessment of the factors noted above, including past due accounts, disputed balances with customers, and the financial condition of customers. The allowance for doubtful accounts is also affected by the time at which uncollectible accounts receivable balances are actually written off.

Mattel believes that its allowance for doubtful accounts at December 31, 2009 is adequate and proper. However, as described above, Mattel’s business is greatly dependent on a small number of customers. Should one or more of Mattel’s major customers experience liquidity problems, then the allowance for doubtful accounts may not be sufficient to cover such losses. Any incremental bad debt charges would negatively affect the results of operations of one or more of Mattel’s business segments.

Inventories, net of an allowance for excess quantities and obsolescence, are stated at the lower of cost or market. Inventory obsolescence reserves are recorded for damaged, obsolete, excess and slow-moving inventory. Management believes that the accounting estimate related to the allowance for obsolescence is a “critical accounting estimate” because changes in the assumptions used to develop the estimate could materially affect key financial measures, including gross profit, net income, and inventories. As more fully described below, valuation of Mattel’s inventory could be impacted by changes in public and consumer preferences, demand for product, or changes in the buying patterns of both retailers and consumers and inventory management of customers.

In the toy industry, orders are subject to cancellation or change at any time prior to shipment since actual shipments of products ordered and order cancellation rates are affected by consumer acceptance of product lines, strength of competing products, marketing strategies of retailers, changes in buying patterns of both retailers and consumers and overall economic conditions. Unexpected changes in these factors could result in excess inventory in a particular product line, which would require management to record a valuation allowance on such inventory.

Mattel bases its production schedules for toy products on customer orders and forecasts, taking into account historical trends, results of market research and current market information. Mattel ships products in accordance with delivery schedules specified by its customers, who usually request delivery within three months. In anticipation of retail sales in the traditional holiday season, Mattel significantly increases its production in advance of the peak selling period, resulting in a corresponding build-up of inventory levels in the first three quarters of its fiscal year. These seasonal purchasing patterns and requisite production lead times cause risk to Mattel’s business associated with the underproduction of popular toys and the overproduction of toys that do not match consumer demand. Retailers are also attempting to manage their inventories more tightly, requiring Mattel to ship products closer to the time the retailers expect to sell the products to consumers. These factors increase inventory valuation risk since Mattel’s inventory levels may be adversely impacted by the need to pre-build products before orders are placed.

Additionally, current conditions in the domestic and global economies are uncertain. As a result, it is difficult to estimate the level of growth or contraction for the economy as a whole. It is even more difficult to estimate growth or contraction in various parts of the economy, including the economies in which Mattel participates. Because all components of Mattel’s budgeting and forecasting are dependent upon estimates of growth or contraction in the markets it serves and demand for its products, the prevailing economic uncertainties make estimates of future demand for product more difficult. Such economic changes may affect the sales of Mattel’s products and its corresponding inventory levels, which could potentially impact the valuation of its inventory.

At the end of each quarter, management within each business segment, Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US, Fisher-Price Brands US, American Girl Brands, and International, performs a detailed review of its inventory on an item-by-item basis and identifies products that are believed to be impaired. Management assesses the need for, and the amount of, an obsolescence reserve based on the following factors:

The time frame between when an estimate is made and the time of disposal depends on the above factors and may vary significantly. Generally, slow-moving inventory is liquidated during the next annual selling cycle.

The decrease in the allowance for obsolescence from 2008 to 2009 was mainly due to lower levels of excess inventory in 2009. Management believes that its allowance for obsolescence at December 31, 2009 is adequate and proper. However, the impact resulting from the aforementioned factors could cause actual results to vary. Any incremental obsolescence charges would negatively affect the results of operations of one or more of Mattel’s business segments.

Mattel tests goodwill and nonamortizable intangible assets for impairment annually, or more often if an event or circumstance indicates that an impairment may have occurred. Management believes that the accounting estimate related to the recoverability of its goodwill and nonamortizable intangible assets is a “critical accounting estimate” because significant changes in the assumptions used to develop the estimates could materially affect key financial measures, including net income, goodwill, and other intangible assets.

The recoverability of goodwill involves a high degree of judgment since the first step of the required impairment test consists of a comparison of the fair value of a reporting unit with its book value. Based on the assumptions underlying the valuation, impairment is determined by estimating the fair value of a reporting unit and comparing that value to the reporting unit’s book value. If the fair value is more than the book value of the reporting unit, an impairment loss is not recognized. If an impairment exists, the fair value of the reporting unit is allocated to all of its assets and liabilities excluding goodwill, with the excess amount representing the fair value of goodwill. An impairment loss is measured as the amount by which the book value of the reporting unit’s goodwill exceeds the estimated fair value of that goodwill.

For purposes of evaluating whether goodwill is impaired, goodwill is allocated to various reporting units, which are either at the operating segment level or one reporting level below the operating segment. Mattel’s reporting units are: Mattel Girls Brands US, Mattel Boys Brands US, Fisher-Price Brands US, American Girl Brands, and International. Goodwill is allocated to Mattel’s reporting units based on an allocation of brand-specific goodwill to the reporting units selling those brands. Mattel utilizes the fair value based upon the discounted cash flows that the business can be expected to generate in the future (the “Income Approach”) when evaluating goodwill for impairment. The Income Approach valuation method requires Mattel to make projections of revenue, operating costs and working capital investment for the reporting unit over a multi-year period. Additionally, management must make an estimate of a weighted average cost of capital that a market participant would use as a discount rate. Changes in these projections or estimates could result in a reporting unit either passing or failing the first step of the impairment model, which could significantly change the amount of any

impairment ultimately recorded. As of September 30, 2009, Mattel performed the annual impairment test for goodwill as required and determined that its goodwill was not impaired since, for each of the reporting units, the fair value of the reporting unit substantially exceeded its carrying amount. Mattel also considered events and circumstances subsequent to the annual impairment tests in concluding there was no impairment at December 31, 2009.

Testing nonamortizable intangible assets for impairment also involves a high degree of judgment due to the assumptions that underlie the valuation. Mattel evaluates nonamortizable intangible assets, including trademarks and trade names, for impairment by comparing the estimated fair values with the carrying values. The fair value is measured using a multi-period royalty savings method, which reflects the savings realized by owning the trademarks and trade names, and thus not having to pay a royalty fee to a third party. As of September 30, 2009, Mattel performed the annual impairment test for nonamortizable intangible assets and determined that the fair value of certain of its nonamortizable intangible assets was below its carrying value. Mattel also tested its amortizable intangible assets for impairment during 2009. As a result of these impairment tests, Mattel recorded impairment charges of approximately $10 million, which are reflected within other selling and administrative expenses. Mattel also considered events and circumstances subsequent to these impairment tests in concluding there was no additional impairment at December 31, 2009.

Mattel routinely enters into arrangements with its customers to provide sales incentives, support customer promotions, and provide allowances for returns and defective merchandise. Such programs are based primarily on customer purchases, customer performance of specified promotional activities, and other specified factors such as sales to consumers. Accruals for these programs are recorded as sales adjustments that reduce gross revenue in the period the related revenue is recognized. Sales adjustments for such programs totaled $503.5 million, $568.0 million, and $622.8 million during 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

The above-described programs primarily involve fixed amounts or percentages of sales to customers. Accruals for such programs are calculated based on an assessment of customers’ purchases and performance under the programs and any other specified factors. While the majority of sales adjustment amounts are readily determinable at period end and do not require estimates, certain of the sales adjustments require management to make estimates. In making these estimates, management considers all available information, including the overall business environment, historical trends and information from customers. Management believes that the accruals recorded for customer programs at December 31, 2009 are adequate and proper.

During 2007, Mattel recalled products with high-powered magnets that may become dislodged and other products, some of which were produced using non-approved paint containing lead in excess of applicable regulatory and Mattel standards. During the second half of 2007, additional products were recalled, withdrawn from retail stores, or replaced at the request of consumers as a result of safety or quality issues (collectively, the “2007 Product Recalls”). In the second quarter of 2008, Mattel determined that certain products had been shipped into foreign markets in which the products did not meet all applicable regulatory standards for those markets. None of these deficiencies related to lead or magnets. Mattel withdrew these products from retail stores in these markets and, although not required to do so, also withdrew the products from the US and other markets because they did not meet Mattel’s internal standards (the “2008 Product Withdrawal”).

and cost estimates for parts and labor if the recalled or withdrawn product is deemed to be repairable, are considered when establishing a product recall or withdrawal reserve. These factors are updated and reevaluated each period and the related reserves are adjusted when these factors indicate that the recall or withdrawal reserve is either not sufficient to cover or exceeds the estimated product recall or withdrawal expenses.

Significant changes in the assumptions used to develop estimates for product recall or withdrawal reserves could affect key financial measures, including accounts receivable, inventory, net sales, cost of sales, other selling and administrative expenses, and net income. In addition, estimating product recall or withdrawal reserves requires a high degree of judgment in areas such as estimating the portion of recalled or withdrawn products sold to end consumers and the portion held by retailers, return rates, shipping and handling for returns, the way in which affected products held by consumers may be remediated (e.g., through redeemable vouchers, or a repair kit being provided), and the costs of meeting regulatory requirements in various countries (e.g., public notification).

The following table summarizes Mattel’s reserves and reserve activity for the 2007 Product Recalls and the 2008 Product Withdrawal (in thousands):

Mattel believes that its reserves for the 2007 Product Recalls and 2008 Product Withdrawal at December 31, 2009 are adequate and proper.

Mattel and certain of its subsidiaries have retirement and other postretirement benefit plans covering substantially all employees of these companies. See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Employee Benefit Plans.”

Actuarial valuations are used in determining amounts recognized in the financial statements for retirement and other postretirement benefit plans. These valuations incorporate the following significant assumptions:

Management believes that these assumptions are “critical accounting estimates” because significant changes in these assumptions could impact Mattel’s results of operations and financial position. Management believes that the assumptions utilized to record its obligations under its plans are reasonable based on the plans’ experience and advice received from its outside actuaries. Mattel reviews its benefit plan assumptions annually and modifies its assumptions based on current rates and trends as appropriate. The effects of such changes in assumptions are amortized as part of plan income or expense in future periods.

At the end of each fiscal year, Mattel determines the weighted average discount rate used to calculate the projected benefit obligation. The discount rate is an estimate of the current interest rate at which the benefit plan liabilities could be effectively settled at the end of the year. The discount rate also impacts the interest cost component of plan income or expense. At December 31, 2009, Mattel determined the discount rate for its domestic benefit plans used in determining the projected and accumulated benefit obligations to be 5.6%, as compared to 5.4% and 6.2% for December 31, 2008 and 2007, respectively. In estimating this rate, Mattel reviews rates of return on high-quality, corporate bond indices, which approximate the timing and amount of benefit payments. Assuming all other benefit plan assumptions remain constant, the increase in the discount rate from 5.4% to 5.6% will result in a decrease in benefit plan expense during 2010 of approximately $0.8 million.

The rate of future compensation increases used by Mattel for the benefit obligation of its domestic defined benefit pension plans averaged 3.8% for 2009, 2008, and 2007, based on plan demographics. The rate of future compensation increases used by Mattel for the net periodic pension cost of its domestic defined benefit pension plans averaged 3.8% for 2009 and 2008, and 4.0% for 2007, based on plan demographics. These assumptions are reviewed annually based on historical salary increases for participants in the defined benefit pension plans. This assumption impacts the service and interest cost components of plan income or expense.

The long-term rate of return on plan assets is based on management’s expectation of earnings on the assets that secure Mattel’s funded defined benefit pension plans, taking into account the mix of invested assets, the arithmetic average of past returns, economic and stock market conditions and future expectations and the long-term nature of the projected benefit obligation to which these investments relate. The long-term rate of return is used to calculate the expected return on plan assets that is used in calculating pension income or expense. The difference between this expected return and the actual return on plan assets is deferred, net of tax, and is included in accumulated other comprehensive loss. The net deferral of past asset gains or losses affects the calculated value of plan assets and, ultimately, future pension income or expense. Mattel’s long-term rate of return for its domestic defined benefit pension plans was 8.0% in 2009, 2008 and 2007. Assuming all other benefit plan assumptions remain constant, a one percentage point decrease in the expected return on plan assets would result in an increase in benefit plan expense during 2010 of approximately $2.5 million.

The health care cost trend rates used by Mattel for its other postretirement benefit plans reflect management’s best estimate of expected claim costs over the next ten years. These trend rates impact the service and interest cost components of plan expense. Rates ranging from 7% in 2009 to 5% in 2011, with rates assumed to stabilize in 2011 and thereafter, were used in determining plan expense for 2009. These rates are reviewed annually and are estimated based on historical costs for participants in the other postretirement benefit plans as well as estimates based on current economic conditions. As of December 31, 2009, Mattel adjusted the health care cost trend rates for its other postretirement benefit plan obligation to range from 6% in 2009 reducing to 5% in 2011, with rates assumed to stabilize in 2011 and thereafter. Assuming all other postretirement benefit plan assumptions remain constant, a one percentage point increase in the assumed health care cost trend rates would increase benefit plan expense during 2010 by approximately $0.1 million.

A one percentage point increase/(decrease) in the assumed health care cost trend rate for each future year would impact the postretirement benefit obligation as of December 31, 2009 by approximately $4.5 million and $(4.0) million, respectively, while a one percentage point increase/(decrease) would impact the service and interest cost recognized for 2009 by approximately $0.3 million and $(0.2) million, respectively.

Mattel recognizes the cost of employee share-based payment awards on a straight-line attribution basis over the requisite employee service period, net of estimated forfeitures. In determining when additional tax benefits associated with share-based payment exercises are recognized, Mattel follows the ordering of deductions under the tax law, which allows deductions for share-based payment exercises to be utilized before previously existing net operating loss carryforwards. In computing dilutive shares under the treasury stock method, Mattel does not reduce the tax benefit amount within the calculation for the amount of deferred tax assets that would have been recognized had Mattel previously expensed all share-based payment awards.

Determining the fair value of share-based awards at the measurement date requires judgment, including estimating the expected term that stock options will be outstanding prior to exercise, the associated volatility, and the expected dividends. The fair value of options granted has been estimated using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The expected life of the options used in this calculation is the period of time the options are expected to be outstanding and has been determined based on historical exercise experience. Expected stock price volatility is based on the historical volatility of Mattel’s stock for a period approximating the expected life, the expected dividend yield is based on Mattel’s most recent actual annual dividend payout, and the risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on US Treasury zero-coupon issues approximating the expected life. Judgment is also required in estimating the amount of share-based awards that will be forfeited prior to vesting. Management believes that these assumptions are “critical accounting estimates” because significant changes in the assumptions used to develop the estimates could materially affect key financial measures, including net income.

The following weighted average assumptions were used in determining the fair value of options granted:

The following table summarizes the sensitivity of valuation assumptions within the calculation of stock option fair values, if all other assumptions are held constant:

Mattel’s income tax provision and related income tax assets and liabilities are based on actual and expected future income, US and foreign statutory income tax rates, and tax regulations and planning opportunities in the various jurisdictions in which Mattel operates. Management believes that the accounting estimate related to income taxes is a “critical accounting estimate” because significant judgment is required in interpreting tax regulations in the US and in foreign jurisdictions, evaluating Mattel’s worldwide uncertain tax positions, and assessing the likelihood of realizing certain tax benefits. Actual results could differ materially from those judgments, and changes in judgments could materially affect Mattel’s consolidated financial statements.

Certain income and expense items are accounted for differently for financial reporting and income tax purposes. As a result, the tax expense reflected in Mattel’s consolidated statements of operations is different than that reported in Mattel’s tax returns filed with the taxing authorities. Some of these differences are permanent, such as expenses that are not deductible in Mattel’s tax return, and some differences reverse over time, such as depreciation expense. These timing differences create deferred income tax assets and liabilities. Deferred income tax assets generally represent items that can be used as a tax deduction or credit in Mattel’s tax returns in future years for which Mattel has already recorded a tax benefit in its consolidated statement of operations. Mattel records a valuation allowance to reduce its deferred income tax assets if, based on the weight of available evidence, management believes expected future taxable income is not likely to support the use of a deduction or credit in that jurisdiction. Management evaluates the level of Mattel’s valuation allowances at least annually, and more frequently if actual operating results differ significantly from forecasted results.

Mattel records unrecognized tax benefits for US federal, state, local, and foreign tax positions related primarily to transfer pricing, tax credits claimed, tax nexus and apportionment. For each reporting period, management applies a consistent methodology to measure unrecognized tax benefits and all unrecognized tax benefits are reviewed periodically and adjusted as circumstances warrant. Mattel’s measurement of its unrecognized tax benefits is based on management’s assessment of all relevant information, including prior audit experience, the status of current audits, conclusions of tax audits, lapsing of applicable statutes of limitations, identification of new issues, and any administrative guidance or developments. Mattel recognizes unrecognized tax benefits in the first financial reporting period in which information becomes available indicating that such benefits will more-likely-than-not be realized.

The 2009 income tax provision includes net tax benefits of $28.8 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of current audits in various jurisdictions around the world, settlements, and enacted tax law changes. The 2007 income tax provision includes net tax benefits of $42.0 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of audits in various jurisdictions around the world, including settlements, partially offset by enacted tax law changes.

In the normal course of business, Mattel is regularly audited by federal, state, local, and foreign tax authorities. The ultimate settlement of any particular issue with the applicable taxing authority could have a material impact on Mattel’s consolidated financial statements.

See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data—Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Summary of Significant Accounting Policies.”

In this Annual Report on Form 10-K, Mattel includes a non-GAAP financial measure, gross sales, which it uses to analyze its operations and to monitor, assess and identify meaningful trends in its operating and financial performance. Net sales, as reported in the consolidated statements of operations, include the impact of sales adjustments such as trade discounts and other allowances. Gross sales represent sales to customers, excluding the impact of sales adjustments, the 2007 Product Recalls, and the 2008 Product Withdrawal. Consistent with its segment reporting, Mattel presents changes in gross sales as a metric for comparing its aggregate, business unit, brand and geographic results to highlight significant trends in Mattel’s business. Changes in gross sales are discussed because, while Mattel records the detail of such sales adjustments in its financial accounting systems at the time of sale, such sales adjustments are generally not associated with individual products, making net sales less meaningful.

A reconciliation of gross sales to the most directly comparable GAAP financial measure, net sales, is as follows:

Currency exchange rate fluctuations may impact Mattel’s results of operations and cash flows. Inventory purchase transactions denominated in the Euro, British pound sterling, Canadian dollar, Mexican peso, Hong Kong dollar, and Indonesian rupiah were the primary transactions that caused currency transaction exposure for Mattel during 2009, 2008, and 2007. Mattel seeks to mitigate its exposure to market risk by monitoring its currency transaction exposure for the year and partially hedging such exposure using foreign currency forward exchange contracts primarily to hedge its purchase and sale of inventory, and other intercompany transactions denominated in foreign currencies. These contracts generally have maturity dates of up to 18 months. For those intercompany receivables and payables that are not hedged along with US dollar cash balances held by certain international subsidiaries, the transaction gains or losses are recorded in the consolidated statement of operations in the period in which the exchange rate changes as part of operating income or other non-operating income, net based on the nature of the underlying transaction. Transaction gains or losses on hedged intercompany inventory transactions are recorded in the consolidated statement of operations in the period in which the inventory is sold to customers. In addition, Mattel manages its exposure to currency exchange rate fluctuations through the selection of currencies used for international borrowings. Mattel does not trade in financial instruments for speculative purposes.

Mattel’s financial position is also impacted by currency exchange rate fluctuations on translation of its net investment in subsidiaries with non-US dollar functional currencies. Assets and liabilities of subsidiaries with non-US dollar functional currencies are translated into US dollars at fiscal year-end exchange rates. Income, expense, and cash flow items are translated at weighted average exchange rates prevailing during the fiscal year. The resulting currency translation adjustments are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss within stockholders’ equity. Mattel’s primary currency translation exposures during 2009 were related to its net investment in entities having functional currencies denominated in the Euro, Mexican peso, Indonesian rupiah, British pound sterling, and Brazilian real.

There are numerous factors impacting the amount by which Mattel’s financial results are affected by foreign currency translation and transaction gains and losses resulting from changes in currency exchange rates, including but not limited to the level of foreign currency forward exchange contracts in place at a given time and the volume of foreign currency denominated transactions in a given period. However, assuming that such factors were held constant, Mattel estimates that a 1 percent change in the US dollar Trade-Weighted Index would impact Mattel’s net sales by approximately 0.5% and its full year earnings per share by approximately $0.01 to $0.02.

Mattel’s foreign currency forward exchange contracts that were used to hedge firm foreign currency commitments as of December 31, 2009 are shown in the following table. All contracts are against the US dollar and are maintained by reporting units with a US dollar functional currency, with the exception of the Indonesian rupiah contracts, which are maintained by entities with a rupiah functional currency.

For the purchase of foreign currencies, fair value reflects the amount, based on dealer quotes, that Mattel would pay at maturity for contracts involving the same currencies and maturity dates, if they had been entered into as of December 31, 2009. For the sale of foreign currencies, fair value reflects the amount, based on dealer quotes, that Mattel would receive at maturity for contracts involving the same currencies and maturity dates, if they had been entered into as of December 31, 2009. The differences between the market forward amounts and the contract amounts are expected to be fully offset by currency transaction gains and losses on the underlying hedged transactions.

In addition to the contracts involving the US dollar detailed in the above table, Mattel also had contracts to sell British pound sterling for the purchase of Euro. As of December 31, 2009, these contracts had a contract amount of $40.8 million and a fair value of $0.5 million.

Had Mattel not entered into hedges to limit the effect of currency exchange rate fluctuations on its results of operations and cash flows, its income before income taxes would have decreased by approximately $13 million in 2009, decreased by approximately $16 million in 2008, and increased by approximately $7 million in 2007.

Mattel’s pricing decisions in Venezuela are intended to mitigate the risks of government imposed currency controls and significant inflation by aligning Mattel’s prices with its expectations of the local currency cost of acquiring inventory and distributing earnings in US dollars. Mattel applies to the Venezuelan government’s Foreign Exchange Administrative Commission, CADIVI, for the conversion of local currency to US dollars at the official exchange rate. The official exchange rate had been fixed at 2.15 Venezuelan bolivar fuertes to the US

dollar through December 31, 2009. For US dollar needs exceeding conversions obtained through CADIVI, the parallel exchange market, with rates substantially less favorable than the official exchange rate, may be used to obtain US dollars without approval from CADIVI.

Effective December 31, 2009, Mattel changed the rate it uses to translate its Venezuelan subsidiary’s transactions and balances from the official exchange rate to the parallel exchange rate, which was quoted at 5.97 Venezuelan bolivar fuertes to the US dollar on December 31, 2009. The resulting foreign currency translation adjustment of approximately $15 million increased accumulated other comprehensive loss within stockholders’ equity as of December 31, 2009. Mattel’s considerations for changing the rate included recent indications that the Venezuelan government is not likely to continue to provide substantial currency exchange at the official rate for companies importing discretionary products, such as toys, recent difficulties in obtaining approval for the conversion of local currency to US dollars at the official exchange rate (for imported products and dividends), delays in previously obtained approvals being honored by CADIVI, and Mattel’s 2009 repatriation of dividends from its Venezuelan subsidiary at the parallel exchange rate. During 2009, Mattel’s Venezuelan subsidiary generated approximately $142 million of net sales and approximately $11 million of net income, which was translated at the official exchange rate. Had Mattel reported results of its Venezuelan operations for 2009 using the simple average of historical parallel exchange rates during 2009 of 6.13 Venezuelan bolivar fuertes to the US dollar instead of the official exchange rate, net sales would have been approximately $95 million lower and net income would have been approximately $7 million lower. Assuming that all else is equal, a 1% increase/(decrease) in the average historical parallel exchange rate would have further decreased/(increased) Mattel’s 2009 net sales and net income by approximately $500 thousand and $100 thousand, respectively.

Effective January 1, 2010, and as required by US GAAP, Mattel will account for Venezuela as a highly inflationary economy as the three-year cumulative inflation rate for Venezuela using the blended Consumer Price Index (which is associated with the city of Caracas) and the National Consumer Price Index (developed commencing in 2008 and covering the entire country of Venezuela) exceeded 100%. Accordingly, Mattel’s Venezuelan subsidiary will use the US dollar as its functional currency effective January 1, 2010. As of December 31, 2009, Mattel’s Venezuelan subsidiary had approximately $20 million of net monetary assets denominated in bolivar fuertes. As a result of the change to a US dollar functional currency, monetary assets and liabilities denominated in bolivar fuertes will generate income or expense in 2010 for changes in value associated with parallel exchange rate fluctuations against the US dollar. For every $10 million of net monetary assets denominated in bolivar fuertes, a 1% increase/(decrease) in the parallel rate would decrease/(increase) Mattel’s pre-tax income by approximately $100 thousand. While Mattel’s level of net monetary assets denominated in bolivar fuertes will vary from one period to another based on operating cycles and seasonality, Mattel does not expect the remeasurement adjustments to be material to Mattel’s consolidated financial statements.

On January 11, 2010, the Venezuelan government devalued the Venezuelan bolivar fuerte and changed to a two-tier exchange structure. The official exchange rate moved from 2.15 bolivar fuerte per US dollar to 2.60 for essential goods and 4.30 for non-essential goods and services, with Mattel’s products falling into the non-essential category. Due to the limited approvals obtained in 2009 for conversion of local currency to US dollars at the official exchange rate, this devaluation did not have a material impact on Mattel’s consolidated financial statements during 2009, and is not expected to materially impact Mattel’s 2010 consolidated financial statements. For any US dollars that Mattel obtains at the official rate, the benefits associated with the favorable exchange rate will be reflected within cost of sales.

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)). Mattel’s management, including Robert A. Eckert, its principal executive officer, and Kevin M. Farr, its principal financial officer, evaluated the effectiveness of Mattel’s internal control over financial reporting using the framework in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Based on this evaluation, management concluded that Mattel’s internal control over financial reporting was effective as of December 31, 2009. The effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009 has been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which appears herein.

In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(1) present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Mattel, Inc. and its subsidiaries at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2009 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. In addition, in our opinion, the financial statement schedule listed in the index appearing under Item 15(a)(2) presents fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein when read in conjunction with the related consolidated financial statements. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2009, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). The Company’s management is responsible for these financial statements and financial statement schedule, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting appearing under Item 8. Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements, on the financial statement schedule, and on the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our integrated 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 audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audits of the financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed 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. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) 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 (iii) 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.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Mattel, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“Mattel”). All majority-owned subsidiaries are consolidated and included in Mattel’s consolidated financial statements. Mattel does not have any minority stock ownership interests in which it has a controlling financial interest that would require consolidation. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. In preparing these financial statements, Mattel evaluated the events and transactions that occurred between December 31, 2009 and February 24, 2010, the date these financial statements were issued.

On July 1, 2009, Mattel adopted Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 105-10 (formerly Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 168, The FASB Accounting Standards Codification and Hierarchy of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, a replacement of FASB Statement No. 162). ASC 105-10 establishes the FASB ASC as the source of authoritative accounting principles recognized by the FASB to be applied in preparation of financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America. The adoption of this standard had no impact on Mattel’s consolidated financial statements.

Preparation of the consolidated financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could ultimately differ from those estimates.

Cash and equivalents include short-term investments, which are highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased. Such investments are stated at cost, which approximates market value.

Credit is granted to customers on an unsecured basis. Credit limits and payment terms are established based on extensive evaluations made on an ongoing basis throughout the fiscal year of the financial performance, cash generation, financing availability, and liquidity status of each customer. Customers are reviewed at least annually, with more frequent reviews performed as necessary, based on the customer’s financial condition and the level of credit being extended. For customers who are experiencing financial difficulties, management performs additional financial analyses before shipping to those customers on credit. Mattel uses a variety of financial arrangements to ensure collectibility of accounts receivable of customers deemed to be a credit risk, including requiring letters of credit, factoring or purchasing various forms of credit insurance with unrelated third parties, or requiring cash in advance of shipment.

Mattel records an allowance for doubtful accounts based on management’s assessment of the business environment, customers’ financial condition, historical collection experience, accounts receivable aging, and customer disputes.

Inventories, net of an allowance for excess quantities and obsolescence, are stated at the lower of cost or market. Cost is determined by the first-in, first-out method.

Property, plant, and equipment are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method over estimated useful lives of 10 to 40 years for buildings, 3 to 10 years for machinery and equipment, and 10 to 20 years, not to exceed the lease term, for leasehold improvements. Tools, dies, and molds are amortized using the straight-line method over 3 years. Estimated useful lives are periodically reviewed and, where appropriate, changes are made prospectively. The carrying value of property, plant, and equipment is reviewed when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value of an asset may not be recoverable. Any potential impairment identified is assessed by evaluating the operating performance and future undiscounted cash flows of the underlying assets. When property is sold or retired, the cost of the property and the related accumulated depreciation are removed from the consolidated balance sheet and any resulting gain or loss is included in the results of operations.

Goodwill is allocated to various reporting units, which are either at the operating segment level or one reporting level below the operating segment, for purposes of evaluating whether goodwill is impaired. Mattel’s reporting units are: Mattel Girls Brands US, Mattel Boys Brands US, Fisher-Price Brands US, American Girl Brands, and International. Mattel tests goodwill for impairment annually in the third quarter, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable, which is based on the fair value of the cash flows that the reporting units are expected to generate in the future.

Mattel also tests its nonamortizable intangible assets, including trademarks and trade names, for impairment by comparing the estimated fair values of the nonamortizable intangible assets with the carrying values. Mattel tests nonamortizable intangible assets annually in the third quarter, or whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying value may not be recoverable. The fair value of trademark and trade name intangibles is measured using a multi-period royalty savings method, which reflects the savings realized by owning the trademarks and trade names, and thus not having to pay a royalty fee to a third party.

Mattel’s reporting currency is the US dollar. The translation of its net investment in subsidiaries with non-US dollar functional currencies subjects Mattel to currency exchange rate fluctuations in its results of operations and financial position. Assets and liabilities of subsidiaries with non-US dollar functional currencies are translated into US dollars at year-end exchange rates. Income, expense, and cash flow items are translated at weighted average exchange rates prevailing during the year. The resulting currency translation adjustments are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss within stockholders’ equity. Mattel’s primary currency translation exposures in 2009 were related to its net investment in entities having functional currencies denominated in the Euro, Mexican peso, Indonesian rupiah, British pound sterling, and Brazilian real.

Currency exchange rate fluctuations may impact Mattel’s results of operations and cash flows. Mattel’s currency transaction exposures include gains and losses realized on unhedged inventory purchases and unhedged receivables and payables balances that are denominated in a currency other than the applicable functional currency. Gains and losses on unhedged inventory purchases and other transactions associated with operating activities are recorded in the components of operating income in the consolidated statement of operations. Gains and losses on unhedged intercompany loans and advances are recorded as a component of other non-operating expense (income), net in the consolidated statements of operations in the period in which the currency exchange rate changes. Inventory purchase transactions denominated in the Euro, British pound sterling, Canadian dollar, Mexican peso, Hong Kong dollar, and Indonesian rupiah were the primary transactions that cause foreign currency transaction exposure for Mattel in 2009.

Mattel applies to the Venezuelan government’s Foreign Exchange Administrative Commission, CADIVI, for the conversion of local currency to US dollars at the official exchange rate. The official exchange rate had been fixed at 2.15 Venezuelan bolivar fuertes to the US dollar through December 31, 2009. For US dollar needs exceeding conversions obtained through CADIVI, the parallel exchange market, with rates substantially less favorable than the official exchange rate, may be used to obtain US dollars without approval from CADIVI.

Mattel uses foreign currency forward exchange contracts as cash flow hedges primarily to hedge its purchases and sales of inventory denominated in foreign currencies. At the inception of the contracts, Mattel designates these derivatives as cash flow hedges and documents the relationship of the hedge to the underlying transaction. Hedge effectiveness is assessed at inception and throughout the life of the hedge to ensure the hedge qualifies for hedge accounting. Changes in fair value associated with hedge ineffectiveness, if any, are recorded in the results of operations. Changes in fair value of the cash flow hedge derivatives are deferred and recorded as part of accumulated other comprehensive income in stockholders’ equity until the underlying transaction affects earnings. In the event that an anticipated transaction is no longer likely to occur, Mattel recognizes the change in fair value of the derivative in its results of operations in the period the determination is made.

Additionally, Mattel uses foreign currency forward exchange contracts to hedge intercompany loans and advances denominated in foreign currencies. Due to the short-term nature of the contracts involved, Mattel does not use hedge accounting for these contracts, and as such, changes in fair value are recorded in the period of change in the consolidated statements of operations.

Revenue is recognized upon shipment or upon receipt of products by the customer, depending on terms, provided that: there are no uncertainties regarding customer acceptance; persuasive evidence of an agreement exists documenting the specific terms of the transaction; the sales price is fixed or determinable; and collectibility is reasonably assured. Management assesses the business environment, the customer’s financial

condition, historical collection experience, accounts receivable aging, and customer disputes to determine whether collectibility is reasonably assured. If collectibility is not considered reasonably assured at the time of sale, Mattel does not recognize revenue until collection occurs. Mattel routinely enters into arrangements with its customers to provide sales incentives, support customer promotions, and provide allowances for returns and defective merchandise. Such programs are based primarily on customer purchases, customer performance of specified promotional activities, and other specified factors such as sales to consumers. The costs of these programs are recorded as sales adjustments that reduce gross revenue in the period the related revenue is recognized.

Costs of media advertising are expensed the first time the advertising takes place, except for direct-response advertising, which is capitalized and amortized over its expected period of future benefits. Direct-response advertising consists primarily of catalog production and mailing costs that are generally amortized within three months from the date the catalogs are mailed.

Mattel establishes a reserve for product recalls and withdrawals on a product-specific basis when circumstances giving rise to the recall or withdrawal become known. Facts and circumstances related to the recall or withdrawal, including where the product affected by the recall or withdrawal is located (e.g., with consumers, in customers’ inventory, or in Mattel’s inventory), cost estimates for shipping and handling for returns, whether the product is repairable, cost estimates for communicating the recall or withdrawal to consumers and customers, and cost estimates for parts and labor if the recalled or withdrawn product is deemed to be repairable, are considered when establishing a product recall or withdrawal reserve. These factors are updated and reevaluated each period and the related reserves are adjusted when these factors indicate that the recall or withdrawal reserve is either not sufficient to cover or exceeds the estimated product recall or withdrawal expenses (see “Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Product Recalls and Withdrawals”).

Product design and development costs are charged to the results of operations as incurred.

Mattel and certain of its subsidiaries have retirement and other postretirement benefit plans covering substantially all employees of these companies. Actuarial valuations are used in determining amounts recognized in the financial statements for retirement and other postretirement benefit plans (see “Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Employee Benefit Plans”).

the expected dividends. Mattel estimates the fair value of options granted using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The expected life of the options used in this calculation is the period of time the options are expected to be outstanding and has been determined based on historical exercise experience. Expected stock price volatility is based on the historical volatility of Mattel’s stock for a period approximating the expected life, the expected dividend yield is based on Mattel’s most recent actual annual dividend payout, and the risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on US Treasury zero-coupon issues approximating the expected life. Judgment is also required in estimating the amount of share-based awards that will be forfeited prior to vesting.

Assumptions used in determining the fair value of options granted, and the resulting fair value, were as follows:

Mattel recognized compensation expense of $13.0 million, $9.5 million, and $7.4 million for stock options during 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, which is included within other selling and administrative expenses. Compensation expense recognized related to employee service based restricted stock units (“RSUs”) was $37.0 million, $26.2 million, and $14.8 million in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, and is also included within other selling and administrative expenses. Additionally, the 2009 and 2008 compensation expense includes $5.3 million and $1.5 million, respectively, of compensation expense associated with performance RSUs granted under Mattel’s January 1, 2008—December 31, 2010 Long-Term Incentive Program, as more fully described in “Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Employee Benefit Plans.” As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation expense related to unvested share-based payments totaled $69.8 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.0 years.

Certain income and expense items are accounted for differently for financial reporting and income tax purposes. Deferred income tax assets and liabilities are determined based on the difference between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities, applying enacted statutory income tax rates in effect for the year in which the differences are expected to reverse.

In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 166, Accounting for Transfers of Financial Assets—an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140. SFAS No. 166 amends SFAS No. 140, Accounting for the Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and the Extinguishments of Liabilities, which seeks to improve the relevance and comparability of the information that a reporting entity provides in its financial statements about transfers of financial assets; the effects of the transfer on its financial position, financial performance, and cash flows; and a transferor’s continuing involvement, if any, in transferred financial assets. SFAS No. 166 eliminates the concept of a qualifying special-purpose entity, creates more stringent conditions for reporting a transfer of a portion of a financial asset as a sale, clarifies other sale-accounting criteria, and changes the initial measurement of a transferor’s interest in transferred financial assets. SFAS No. 166 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009. Mattel does not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 166 to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

In June 2009, the FASB issued SFAS No. 167, Amendments to FASB Interpretation No. 46(R). SFAS No. 167 amends FASB Interpretation No. (“FIN”) 46, Consolidation of Variable Interest Entities (revised December 2003)—an interpretation of ARB No. 51, which requires an enterprise to determine whether its variable interest or interests give it a controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity. The primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity is the enterprise that has both (i) the power to direct the activities of a variable interest entity that most significantly impact the entity’s economic performance, and (ii) the obligation to absorb losses of the entity that could potentially be significant to the variable interest entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity that could potentially be significant to the variable interest entity. SFAS No. 167 also amends FIN 46(R) to require ongoing reassessments of whether an enterprise is the primary beneficiary of a variable interest entity. SFAS No. 167 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009. Mattel does not expect the adoption of SFAS No. 167 to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements.

The change in the carrying amount of goodwill by reporting unit for 2009 and 2008 is shown below. Brand-specific goodwill held by foreign subsidiaries is allocated to the US reporting units selling those brands, thereby causing foreign currency translation impact to the US reporting units.

In 2009, Mattel performed the annually required impairment tests and determined that its goodwill was not impaired. Mattel has not recorded any goodwill impairment subsequent to its initial adoption of ASC 350-20 (formerly SFAS No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets), which was on January 1, 2002.

In 2009, Mattel performed the annual impairment test and determined that certain of its nonamortizable intangible assets was impaired. Mattel also tested its amortizable intangible assets for impairment during 2009. As a result of these impairment tests, Mattel recorded impairment charges of approximately $10 million, which are reflected within other selling and administrative expenses. Nonamortizable and amortizable intangible assets were determined to not be impaired in 2008 and 2007.

In October 2008, Mattel acquired Sekkoia SAS, which owns the Blokus^® trademark and trade name rights, for $35.1 million, including acquisition costs. In connection with the acquisition, Mattel recorded goodwill and amortizable identifiable intangible assets totaling $18.1 million and $22.9 million, respectively.

In August 2008, Mattel acquired the intellectual property rights related to Whac-a-Mole^® for $23.5 million, including acquisition costs, which is included within amortizable identifiable intangibles.

The provision (benefit) for current and deferred income taxes consists of the following:

Deferred income taxes are provided principally for tax credit carryforwards, research and development expenses, net operating loss carryforwards, employee compensation-related expenses and certain other reserves that are recognized in different years for financial statement and income tax reporting purposes. Mattel’s deferred income tax assets (liabilities) are composed of the following:

Net deferred income tax assets are reported in the consolidated balance sheets as follows:

As of December 31, 2009, Mattel has federal and foreign loss carryforwards totaling $143.8 million and tax credit carryforwards of $209.2 million, which does not include carryforwards that do not meet the threshold for recognition in the financial statements. Utilization of these loss and tax credit carryforwards is subject to annual limitations. Mattel’s loss and tax credit carryforwards expire in the following periods:

Management considered all available evidence under existing tax law and anticipated expiration of tax statutes and determined that a valuation allowance of $112.0 million was required as of December 31, 2009 for those loss and tax credit carryforwards that are not expected to provide future tax benefits. Changes in the valuation allowance for 2009 include increases in the valuation allowance for 2009 foreign losses without

benefits, and decreases in the valuation allowance for utilization and expiration of tax loss and tax credit carryforwards. Management believes it is more-likely-than-not that Mattel will generate sufficient taxable income in the appropriate future periods to realize the benefit of the remaining net deferred income tax assets of $567.1 million. Changes in enacted tax laws could negatively impact Mattel’s ability to fully realize all of the benefits of its remaining net deferred tax assets.

Differences between the provision for income taxes at the US federal statutory income tax rate and the provision in the consolidated statements of operations are as follows:

In assessing whether uncertain tax positions should be recognized in its financial statements, Mattel first determines whether it is more-likely-than-not (a greater than 50 percent likelihood) that a tax position will be sustained upon examination, including resolution of any related appeals or litigation processes, based on the technical merits of the position. In evaluating whether a tax position has met the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, Mattel presumes that the position will be examined by the appropriate taxing authority that would have full knowledge of all relevant information. For tax positions that meet the more-likely-than-not recognition threshold, Mattel measures the amount of benefit recognized in the financial statements at the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50 percent likely of being realized upon ultimate settlement. Mattel recognizes unrecognized tax benefits in the first financial reporting period in which information becomes available indicating that such benefits will more-likely-than-not be realized.

Mattel records unrecognized tax benefits for US federal, state, local, and foreign tax positions related primarily to transfer pricing, tax credits claimed, tax nexus, and apportionment. For each reporting period, management applies a consistent methodology to measure unrecognized tax benefits and all unrecognized tax benefits are reviewed periodically and adjusted as circumstances warrant. Mattel’s measurement of its unrecognized tax benefits is based on management’s assessment of all relevant information, including prior audit experience, the status of current audits, conclusions of tax audits, lapsing of applicable statutes of limitations, and any administrative guidance or developments.

Of the $230.0 million of unrecognized tax benefits as of December 31, 2009, $223.0 million would impact the effective tax rate if recognized. However, a valuation allowance would likely be required for a substantial portion of this amount, thereby offsetting the effective tax rate benefit.

During 2009, Mattel recognized $1.0 million of interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits. As of December 31, 2009, Mattel had accrued $14.9 million in interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits. Of this balance, $14.3 million would impact the effective tax rate if recognized.

During 2009, Mattel finalized tax positions related to the recognition of a capital loss from the liquidation of certain Canadian subsidiaries acquired as part of The Learning Company acquisition, as well as capitalization of certain costs that had been previously deducted on its tax returns. These tax positions had no impact on Mattel’s consolidated financial statements. In the event the unrecognized tax benefit related to the capital loss tax position were to later meet the financial statement recognition requirements, it is uncertain as to whether there would be any benefit to Mattel’s provision for income taxes as projected capital gain income in the carryforward period to utilize this capital loss may not be sufficient and a valuation allowance, up to the full amount, would likely be required. These tax positions are reported in the table above as a $191.8 million increase in unrecognized tax benefits for positions taken in a prior year and a $21.4 million decrease in unrecognized tax benefits for settlements with taxing authorities.

In the normal course of business, Mattel is regularly audited by federal, state, local, and foreign tax authorities. The US Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) is currently auditing Mattel’s 2006 and 2007 federal income tax returns. Mattel files multiple state and local income tax returns and remains subject to examination in various of these jurisdictions, including California for the 2005 through 2009 tax years, New York for the 2004 through 2009 tax years and Wisconsin for the 2007 through 2009 tax years. Mattel files multiple foreign income tax returns and remains subject to examination in major foreign jurisdictions, including Hong Kong and Venezuela for the 2003 through 2009 tax years, and Brazil, Mexico, and the Netherlands for the 2004 through 2009 tax years. Significant changes in unrecognized tax benefits are not expected during the next twelve months. The ultimate settlement of any particular issue with the applicable taxing authority could have a material impact on Mattel’s consolidated financial statements.

In 2009, net income was positively impacted by net tax benefits of $28.8 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of current audits in various jurisdictions around the world, settlements, and enacted tax law changes. In 2007, net income was positively impacted by net tax benefits of $42.0 million related to reassessments of prior years’ tax exposures based on the status of audits in various jurisdictions around the world, including settlements, partially offset by enacted tax law changes.

The cumulative amount of undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries that Mattel intends to indefinitely reinvest and for which no deferred US income taxes have been provided is approximately $3.5 billion as of December 31, 2009. Management periodically reviews the undistributed earnings of its foreign subsidiaries and reassesses its intent to indefinitely reinvest such earnings.

The additional US income tax on unremitted foreign earnings, if repatriated, would be offset in whole or in part by foreign tax credits. The extent of this offset would depend on many factors, including the method of distribution, and specific earnings distributed.

Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that tax benefits related to the exercise of nonqualified stock options and stock warrants be credited to additional paid-in-capital in the period in which such amounts reduce current taxes payable. The exercise of nonqualified stock options and vesting of other stock compensation awards resulted in increases/(decreases) to additional paid-in-capital for related income tax benefits totaling $36.7 million, ($2.3) million, and $5.7 million, in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

The following table summarizes Mattel’s reserves and reserve activity for the 2007 Product Recalls and the 2008 Product Withdrawal (in thousands):

Following the announcement of the 2007 Product Recalls, a number of lawsuits were filed against Mattel with respect to the recalled products, which are more fully described in “Note 14 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Commitments and Contingencies.” During 2009, Mattel recorded charges of $27.4 million, which are included in other selling and administrative expenses, to reserve for the settlement of a portion of the above-described product liability-related litigation. Additionally, during 2009, Mattel recorded a $6.0 million benefit associated with an insurance recovery for product liability-related litigation.

Although management is not aware of any additional quality or safety issues that are likely to result in material recalls or withdrawals, there can be no assurance that additional issues will not be identified in the future.

During the second quarter of 2008, Mattel initiated its Global Cost Leadership program, which is designed to improve operating efficiencies and leverage Mattel’s global scale to improve profitability and operating cash flows. The major initiatives within Mattel’s Global Cost Leadership program include:

In connection with the Global Cost Leadership program, during 2008 and 2009, Mattel recorded severance and other termination-related charges of $34.4 million and $31.5 million, respectively, which are included in other selling and administrative expenses. The following table summarizes Mattel’s severance and other termination costs activity for 2008 and 2009 (in thousands):

Effective January 1, 2009, Mattel adopted ASC 260-10 (formerly FASB Staff Position (“FSP”) Emerging Issues Task Force No. 03-6-1, Determining Whether Instruments Granted in Share-Based Payment Transactions Are Participating Securities). Under ASC 260-10, unvested share-based payment awards that contain nonforfeitable rights to dividends or dividend equivalents (whether paid or unpaid) are participating securities and shall be included in the computation of earnings per share pursuant to the two-class method. Certain of Mattel’s RSUs are considered participating securities because they contain nonforfeitable rights to dividend equivalents. The retrospective application of this standard reduced previously reported basic and diluted earnings per share by $0.01 for 2008 and 2007.

Under the two-class method, net income is reduced by the amount of dividends declared in the period for each class of common stock and participating securities. The remaining undistributed earnings are then allocated to common stock and participating securities as if all of the net income for the period had been distributed. Basic earnings per common share excludes dilution and is calculated by dividing net income allocable to common shares by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per common share is calculated by dividing net income allocable to common shares by the weighted average number of common shares for the period, as adjusted for the potential dilutive effect of non-participating share-based awards. The following table reconciles earnings per common share:

The calculation of potential common shares assumes the exercise of dilutive stock options and vesting of non-participating RSUs, net of assumed treasury share repurchases at average market prices. Nonqualified stock options and non-participating RSUs totaling 19.0 million shares, 17.8 million shares, and 3.2 million shares were excluded from the calculation of diluted net income per common share for 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, because they were antidilutive.

Mattel and certain of its subsidiaries have qualified and nonqualified retirement plans covering substantially all employees of these companies. These plans include defined benefit pension plans, defined contribution retirement plans, postretirement benefit plans, and deferred compensation and excess benefit plans. In addition, Mattel makes contributions to government-mandated retirement plans in countries outside the US where its employees work.

Mattel provides defined benefit pension plans for eligible domestic employees, which are intended to comply with the requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). Some of Mattel’s foreign subsidiaries have defined benefit pension plans covering substantially all of their eligible employees. Mattel funds these plans in accordance with the terms of the plans and local statutory requirements, which differ for each of the countries in which the subsidiaries are located. Mattel also has unfunded postretirement health insurance plans covering certain eligible domestic employees.

A summary of the components of Mattel’s net periodic benefit cost and other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in other comprehensive income for the years ended December 31 are as follows:

Net periodic benefit cost for Mattel’s domestic defined benefit pension and postretirement benefit plans was calculated on January 1 of each year using the following assumptions:

Discount rates, weighted average rates of future compensation increases, and long-term rates of return on plan assets for Mattel’s foreign defined benefit pension plans differ from the assumptions used for Mattel’s domestic defined benefit pension plans due to differences in local economic conditions in which the non-US plans are based. The rates shown in the preceding table are indicative of the weighted average rates of all Mattel’s defined benefit pension plans given the relative insignificance of the foreign plans to the consolidated total.

The estimated net loss and prior service cost for the defined benefit pension plans that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive loss into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year is $15.7 million. The estimated net loss for the other defined benefit postretirement plans that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive loss into net period benefit cost over the next fiscal year is $0.2 million.

Mattel used a measurement date of December 31, 2009 for its defined benefit pension plans and postretirement benefit plans. A summary of the changes in benefit obligation and plans assets is as follows:

The accumulated benefit obligation differs from the projected benefit obligation in that it assumes future compensation levels will remain unchanged. Mattel’s accumulated benefit obligation for its defined benefit pension plans as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 totaled $476.1 million and $446.2 million, respectively. Mattel does not have any defined benefit pension plans for which the plan assets exceed the accumulated benefit obligation.

The assumptions used in determining the projected and accumulated benefit obligations of Mattel’s domestic defined benefit pension and postretirement benefit plans are as follows:

The estimated future benefit payments for Mattel’s defined benefit pension and postretirement benefit plans are as follows:

Mattel expects to make cash contributions totaling approximately $18 million to its defined benefit pension and postretirement benefit plans in 2010, which includes approximately $9 million for benefit payments for its unfunded plans.

Mattel periodically commissions a study of the plans’ assets and liabilities to determine an asset allocation that would best match expected cash flows from the plans’ assets to expected benefit payments. Mattel monitors the returns earned by the plans’ assets and reallocates investments as needed. Mattel’s overall investment strategy is to achieve an adequately diversified asset allocation mix of investments that provides for both near-term benefit payments as well as long-term growth. The assets are invested in a combination of indexed and actively managed funds. The target allocations for Mattel’s domestic plan assets, which comprise 81% of Mattel’s total plan assets, are 35% in US equities, 35% in non-US equities, 20% in US long-term bonds, and 10% in US Treasury inflation protected securities. The US equities are benchmarked against the S&P 500, and the non-US equities are benchmarked against a combination of developed and emerging markets indexes. Fixed income securities are long-duration bonds intended to more closely match the duration of the liabilities and include US government treasuries and agencies, corporate bonds from various industries, and mortgage-backed securities.

As of December 31, 2009, Mattel’s plan assets are measured and reported in the financial statements at fair value using Level 2 inputs (as more fully described in “Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Fair Value Measurements”) and are composed of the following (in thousands):

The fair value of collective trust funds and mutual funds shares are determined based on the net asset value of shares held at year-end. The fair value of US Government, US Government agency securities, and corporate debt instruments are determined based on quoted market prices.

Mattel’s defined benefit pension plan assets are not directly invested in Mattel common stock. Mattel believes that the long-term rate of return on plan assets of 8.0% as of December 31, 2009 is reasonable based on historical returns.

During 1999, Mattel amended the Fisher-Price Pension Plan to convert it from a career-average plan to a cash balance plan and applied for a determination letter from the IRS. In 2003, Mattel amended the Fisher-Price Pension Plan to reflect recent changes in regulations and court cases associated with cash balance plans and submitted a new application for a determination letter to the IRS. Mattel plans to convert the Fisher-Price Pension Plan to a cash balance plan upon receipt of a determination letter.

Domestic employees are eligible to participate in a 401(k) savings plan, the Mattel, Inc. Personal Investment Plan (the “Plan”), sponsored by Mattel, which is a funded defined contribution plan intended to comply with ERISA’s requirements. Contributions to the Plan include voluntary contributions by eligible employees and employer automatic and matching contributions by Mattel. The Plan allows employees to allocate both their voluntary contributions and their employer automatic and matching contributions to a variety of investment funds, including a fund that is fully invested in Mattel common stock (the “Mattel Stock Fund”). Employees are not required to allocate any of their Plan account balance to the Mattel Stock Fund, which allows employees to limit or eliminate their exposure to market changes in Mattel’s stock price. Furthermore, the Plan limits the percentage of the employee’s total account balance that may be allocated to the Mattel Stock Fund to 25%. Employees may generally reallocate their account balances on a daily basis. However, pursuant to Mattel’s insider trading policy, employees classified as insiders and restricted personnel under Mattel’s insider trading policy are limited to certain periods in which they may make allocations into or out of the Mattel Stock Fund.

Certain non-US employees participate in other defined contribution retirement plans with varying vesting and contribution provisions.

Mattel maintains a deferred compensation plan that permits certain officers and key employees to elect to defer portions of their compensation. The deferred compensation plan, together with certain contributions made by Mattel and participating employees to an excess benefit plan, earns various rates of return. The liability for these plans as of December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $45.6 million and $42.7 million, respectively, and is included in other noncurrent liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets. Changes in the market value of the participant selected investment options are recorded as retirement plan expense within other selling and administrative

expenses. Separately, Mattel has purchased group trust-owned life insurance contracts designed to assist in funding these programs. The cash surrender value of these policies, valued at $60.4 million and $55.3 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively, are held in an irrevocable grantor trust, the assets of which are subject to the claims of Mattel’s creditors and are included in other noncurrent assets in the consolidated balance sheets.

Mattel has annual incentive compensation plans under which officers and key employees may earn incentive compensation based on Mattel’s performance and subject to certain approvals of the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. For 2009, 2008, and 2007, $96.6 million, $15.4 million, and $73.5 million, respectively, was charged to expense for awards under these plans.

The Mattel 2003 Long-Term Incentive Plan was approved by Mattel’s stockholders in May 2003 and expired in 2008. This plan was intended to motivate and retain key executives of Mattel who regularly and directly make or influence decisions that affect the medium- and long-term success of Mattel. This plan became effective as of January 1, 2003 and replaced a prior long-term incentive plan that was approved in June 1999.

Mattel has had two long-term incentive program (“LTIP”) performance cycles in place for some portion of the time period between 2007 and 2009: (i) a January 1, 2005—December 31, 2007 performance cycle, which was established by the Compensation Committee of Mattel’s Board of Directors in March 2005, and (ii) a January 1, 2008—December 31, 2010 performance cycle, which was established by the Compensation Committee of Mattel’s Board of Directors in March 2008.

For the January 1, 2005—December 31, 2007 LTIP performance cycle, cumulative financial performance was measured against annually escalating operating result targets that used a net operating profit after taxes less capital charge calculation. Because the performance targets escalate each year, reaching the cumulative targets became increasingly difficult when the performance targets were not met in the earlier periods. Awards were based upon the financial performance of Mattel during the specified performance period and were settled in cash when the required financial performance was met. During 2006, considering Mattel’s actual cumulative performance during 2005 and 2006 and expectations for 2007, Mattel determined that the likelihood of payments being made was probable, and $14.8 million was charged to expense. During 2007, an additional $10.1 million was charged to expense for a cumulative total of $24.9 million relating to the January 1, 2005—December 31, 2007 LTIP performance cycle, which was subsequently paid in cash during 2008.

For the January 1, 2008—December 31, 2010 LTIP performance cycle, during 2009 and 2008, Mattel granted performance RSUs under the Mattel, Inc. 2005 Equity Compensation Plan to officers and certain employees providing services to Mattel. Performance RSUs are units that may become payable in shares of Mattel’s common stock at the end of the three-year performance period, beginning January 1, 2008 and ending December 31, 2010 (“the performance period”). Performance RSUs are earned based on an initial target number with the final number of performance RSUs payable being determined based on the product of the initial target number of performance RSUs multiplied by a performance factor based on measurements of Mattel’s performance with respect to: (i) annual operating result targets for each year in the performance period using a net operating profit after taxes less capital charge calculation (“the performance-related component”), and (ii) Mattel’s total stockholder return (“TSR”) for the three-year performance period relative to the TSR realized by companies comprising the S&P 500 as of January 1, 2008 (“the market-related component”). For the performance-related component, the range of possible outcomes is that between zero and 0.7 million shares are earned for each of the three years during the three-year performance period. For the market-related component, possible outcomes range from an upward adjustment of 0.7 million shares to a downward adjustment of 0.7 million shares to the results of the performance-related component over the three-year performance period.

For the January 1, 2008—December 31, 2010 LTIP performance cycle, the weighted average grant date fair value of the performance-related and market-related components of the performance RSUs were $10.36 and $3.99 per share, respectively, for 2009, and $18.14 and $3.99 per share, respectively, for 2008. The fair value of the performance-related component was based on the closing stock price of Mattel’s common stock on the date of grant, reduced by the present value of estimated dividends to be paid during the performance period as the awards are not credited with dividend equivalents for actual dividends paid on Mattel’s common stock. The fair value of the market-related component was estimated at the grant date using a Monte Carlo valuation methodology. Share-based compensation is recognized as expense over the performance period using a straight-line expense attribution approach reduced for estimated forfeitures. During 2009, $3.4 million was charged to expense relating to the performance-related component as the 2009 actual results exceeded the 2009 performance threshold. During 2008, $0 was charged to expense relating to the performance-related component as the 2008 actual results were below the 2008 performance threshold at the minimum award level and no shares were earned. Additionally, during 2009 and 2008, Mattel recognized share-based compensation expense of $1.9 million and $1.5 million, respectively, for the market-related component.

Mattel maintains and periodically amends or replaces its domestic unsecured committed revolving credit facility with a commercial bank group that is used as the primary source of financing for the seasonal working capital requirements of its domestic subsidiaries. The agreement in effect was amended and restated on March 23, 2009 to, among other things, (i) extend the maturity date of the credit facility to March 23, 2012, (ii) reduce aggregate commitments under the credit facility from $1.3 billion to $880.0 million, with an “accordion feature,” which would allow Mattel to increase the availability under the credit facility to $1.08 billion under certain circumstances, (iii) add an interest rate floor equal to 30-day US Dollar London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 1.00% for base rate loans under the credit facility, (iv) increase the applicable interest rate margins to a range of 2.00% to 3.00% above the applicable base rate for base rate loans, and 2.5% to 3.5% above the applicable LIBOR rate for Eurodollar rate loans, depending on Mattel’s senior unsecured long-term debt rating, (v) increase commitment fees to a range of 0.25% to 0.75% of the unused commitments under the credit facility, and (vi) replace the consolidated debt-to-capital ratio with a consolidated debt-to-earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (“EBITDA”) ratio. During 2009, Mattel utilized the accordion feature of the credit facility to increase the aggregate commitments under the credit facility from $880.0 million to $1.08 billion, which is the maximum aggregate commitment available under the credit facility. Mattel is required to meet financial covenants at the end of each fiscal quarter and fiscal year, using the formulae specified in the credit agreement to calculate the ratios. Mattel was in compliance with such covenants at the end of each fiscal quarter and fiscal year in 2009. As of December 31, 2009, Mattel’s consolidated debt-to-EBITDA ratio, as calculated per the terms of the credit agreement, was 1.2 to 1 (compared to a maximum allowed of 3.0 to 1) and Mattel’s interest coverage ratio was 12.6 to 1 (compared to a minimum required of 3.50 to 1).

The domestic unsecured committed revolving credit facility is a material agreement and failure to comply with the financial covenant ratios may result in an event of default under the terms of the facility. If Mattel defaulted under the terms of the domestic unsecured committed revolving credit facility, its ability to meet its seasonal financing requirements could be adversely affected.

To finance seasonal working capital requirements of certain foreign subsidiaries, Mattel avails itself of individual short-term credit lines with a number of banks. As of December 31, 2009, foreign credit lines totaled approximately $155 million, a portion of which are used to support letters of credit. Mattel expects to extend the majority of these credit lines throughout 2010.

In June 2006, Mattel issued $100.0 million of unsecured floating rate senior notes (“Floating Rate Senior Notes”) due June 15, 2009 and $200.0 million of unsecured 6.125% senior notes (“6.125% Senior Notes”) due June 15, 2011 (collectively “2006 Senior Notes”). Interest on the Floating Rate Senior Notes is based on the

three-month US Dollar London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 40 basis points with interest payable quarterly beginning September 15, 2006. Interest on the 6.125% Senior Notes is payable semi-annually beginning December 15, 2006. The 6.125% Senior Notes may be redeemed at any time at the option of Mattel at a redemption price equal to the greater of (i) the principal amount of the notes being redeemed plus accrued interest to the redemption date, or (ii) a “make whole” amount based on the yield of a comparable US Treasury security plus 20 basis points.

In June 2006, Mattel entered into two interest rate swap agreements on the $100.0 million Floating Rate Senior Notes, each in a notional amount of $50.0 million, for the purpose of hedging the variability of cash flows in the interest payments due to fluctuations of the LIBOR benchmark interest rate. These cash flow hedges were reported in Mattel’s consolidated balance sheets at fair value, with changes in the fair value of the hedges reflected in accumulated other comprehensive income. Under the terms of the agreements, Mattel received quarterly interest payments from the swap counterparties based on the three-month LIBOR plus 40 basis points and made semi-annual interest payments to the swap counterparties based on a fixed rate of 5.87125%. The three-month LIBOR used to determine interest payments under the interest rate swap agreements reset every three months, matching the variable interest on the Floating Rate Senior Notes. The agreements expired in June 2009, which corresponded with the maturity of the Floating Rate Senior Notes.

In March 2008, Mattel issued $350.0 million of unsecured 5.625% Senior Notes (“2008 Senior Notes”) due March 15, 2013. Interest on the 2008 Senior Notes is payable semi-annually on March 15 and September 15 of each year, beginning September 15, 2008. Mattel may redeem all or part of the 2008 Senior Notes at any time or from time to time at its option at a redemption price equal to the greater of (i) 100% of the principal amount of the notes being redeemed plus accrued and unpaid interest to the redemption date, or (ii) a “make-whole” amount based on the yield of a comparable US Treasury security plus 50 basis points.

In September 2007, a major credit rating agency reaffirmed Mattel’s long-term credit rating at BBB-, but changed the outlook from positive to stable. In August 2007, another major credit rating agency maintained its long-term credit rating at BBB, but changed its outlook to positive. In May 2007, an additional credit rating agency maintained its long-term rating for Mattel at Baa2, but changed its long-term outlook from negative to stable. Management does not expect these actions to have a significant impact on Mattel’s ability to obtain financing or to have a significant negative impact on Mattel’s liquidity or results of operations.

Mattel believes its cash on hand, amounts available under its domestic unsecured committed revolving credit facility, and its foreign credit lines will be adequate to meet its seasonal financing requirements in 2010.

Mattel has a $300.0 million domestic receivables sales facility that was also amended in connection with the amendment of the credit facility. The amendment to the receivables sales facility, among other things, (i) extended the maturity date of the receivables sales facility to March 23, 2012, and (ii) incorporated the credit facility’s increased applicable interest rate margins described above. The outstanding amount of receivables sold under the domestic receivables facility may not exceed $300.0 million at any given time, and the amount available to be borrowed under the credit facility is reduced to the extent of any such outstanding receivables sold. Under the domestic receivables facility, certain trade receivables are sold to a group of banks, which currently include, among others, Bank of America, N.A., as administrative agent, Citicorp USA, Inc. and Barclays Bank PLC, as co-syndication agents, and Societe Generale and BNP Paribas, as co-documentation agents. Pursuant to the domestic receivables facility, Mattel Sales Corp., Fisher-Price, Inc., and Mattel Direct Import, Inc. (which are wholly owned subsidiaries of Mattel) can sell eligible trade receivables from Wal-Mart and Target to Mattel Factoring, Inc. (“Mattel Factoring”), a Delaware corporation and wholly owned, consolidated subsidiary of Mattel. Mattel Factoring is a special purpose entity whose activities are limited to purchasing and selling receivables under this facility. Pursuant to the terms of the domestic receivables facility and simultaneous with each receivables purchase, Mattel Factoring sells those receivables to the bank group. Mattel records the transaction, reflecting cash proceeds and sale of accounts receivable in its consolidated balance sheet, at the time of the sale of the receivables to the bank group.

Sales of receivables pursuant to the domestic receivables sales facility occur periodically, generally quarterly. The receivables are sold by Mattel Sales Corp., Fisher-Price, Inc., and Mattel Direct Import, Inc. to Mattel Factoring, who then sells such receivables to the bank group at a slight discount, and Mattel acts as a servicer for such receivables. Mattel has designated Mattel Sales Corp. and Fisher-Price, Inc. as sub-servicers, as permitted by the facility. Mattel’s appointment as a servicer is subject to termination events that are customary for such transactions. The domestic receivables sales facility is also subject to conditions to funding, representations and warranties, undertakings and early termination events that are customary for transactions of this nature. Mattel retains a servicing interest in the receivables sold under this facility. The fair value of the net servicing asset is based on an estimate of interest Mattel earns on cash collections prior to remitting the funds to the bank group, partially offset by an estimate of the cost of servicing the trade receivables sold. The fair value of the net servicing asset totaled $0.1 million and $0.2 million as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively.

Mattel’s aggregate losses on receivables sold under the domestic and other trade receivables facilities were $7.4 million, $5.4 million, and $9.3 million during 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

The outstanding amounts of accounts receivable that have been sold under these facilities and other factoring arrangements, net of collections from customers, have been excluded from Mattel’s consolidated balance sheets and are summarized as follows:

As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, Mattel had foreign short-term bank loans outstanding of $2.0 million and $0, respectively. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, Mattel had no borrowings outstanding under the domestic unsecured committed credit facilities.

During 2009 and 2008, Mattel had average borrowings of $6.9 million and $9.1 million, respectively, under its foreign short-term bank loans, and $323.7 million and $559.7 million, respectively, under its domestic unsecured committed credit facilities and other short-term borrowings, to help finance its seasonal working capital requirements. The weighted average interest rate during 2009 and 2008 was 12.4% and 15.3%, respectively, on foreign short-term bank loans and 2.3% and 3.6%, respectively, on domestic unsecured committed credit facilities and other short-term borrowings.

Mattel’s medium-term notes bear interest at fixed rates ranging from 6.50% to 7.40%, with a weighted average interest rate of 7.06% and 7.12% as of December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. During 2009, Mattel repaid $50.0 million of medium-term notes in connection with their maturities.

During 2009, Mattel repaid $100.0 million of the Floating Rate Senior Notes in connection with their maturity.

The aggregate amount of long-term debt maturing in the next five years is as follows:

Mattel is authorized to issue up to 20.0 million shares of $0.01 par value preference stock, of which none is currently outstanding.

Mattel is authorized to issue up to 3.0 million shares of $1.00 par value preferred stock, of which none is currently outstanding.

In 2009, 2008, and 2007, Mattel paid a dividend per share of $0.75 to holders of its common stock. The Board of Directors declared the dividends in November of each year, and Mattel paid the dividends in December of each year. The payment of dividends on common stock is at the discretion of the Board of Directors and is subject to customary limitations.

The changes in the components of comprehensive income, net of tax, are as follows:

For 2009, currency translation adjustments resulted in a net gain of $52.2 million, with gains from the strengthening of the Brazilian real, Euro, Chilean peso, and British pound sterling against the US dollar. For 2008, currency translation adjustments resulted in a net loss of $192.6 million, with losses from the weakening of the British pound sterling, Mexican Peso, Brazilian real, Euro, and Chilean peso against the US dollar. For 2007, currency translation adjustments resulted in a net gain of $86.7 million, with gains from the strengthening of the Euro, Brazilian real, Australian dollar, and British pound sterling against the US dollar, partially offset by the weakening of the Indonesian rupiah and Mexican peso against the US dollar.

In May 2005, Mattel’s stockholders approved the Mattel, Inc. 2005 Equity Compensation Plan (the “2005 Plan”). Upon approval of the 2005 Plan, Mattel terminated its Amended and Restated 1996 Stock Option Plan (the “1996 Plan”) and its 1999 Stock Option Plan (the “1999 Plan”), except with respect to grants then outstanding under the 1996 Plan and the 1999 Plan. Restricted stock awards made under the 1996 Plan continue to vest pursuant to the terms of their respective grant agreements. Outstanding stock option grants under plans that have expired or have been terminated continue to be exercisable under the terms of their respective grant agreements. All such stock options expire no later than ten years from the date of grant and generally provide for vesting over a period of three years from the date of grant. Stock options generally were granted with exercise prices equal to the fair market value of Mattel’s common stock on the date of grant, although there are some outstanding stock options that were granted with an exercise price in excess of the fair market value of Mattel’s common stock on the date of grant, as to which vesting was dependent upon Mattel’s common stock achieving a specified fair market value during a specified time period. Options were granted to non-employee members of Mattel’s Board of Directors under the 1996 Plan with exercise prices equal to the fair market value of Mattel’s common stock on the date of grant; such options expire no later than ten years from the date of grant and vest over a period of four years from the date of grant.

Under the 2005 Plan, Mattel has the ability to grant nonqualified stock options, incentive stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, RSUs, dividend equivalent rights, and shares of common stock to officers, employees, and other persons providing services to Mattel. Generally, options vest and become exercisable contingent upon the grantees’ continued employment or service with Mattel. Nonqualified stock options are granted at not less than 100% of the fair market value of Mattel’s common stock on the date of grant, expire no later than ten years from the date of grant, and vest on a schedule determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors, generally during a period of three years from the date of grant. In the event of a retirement of an employee aged 55 years or greater with 5 or more years of service that occurs at least 6 months after the grant date, nonqualified stock options become fully vested. With regard to grants of stock options in the 2007 annual grant and later, death and disability at least 6 months after the grant date also result in accelerated vesting. With regard to grants of stock options before the 2007 annual grant, there is no accelerated vesting for death or disability. Similar provisions exist for non-employee directors. RSUs granted under the 2005 Plan are generally accompanied by dividend equivalent rights and generally vest over a period of three years from the date of grant. In the event of the involuntary termination of an employee aged 55 years or greater with 5 or more years of service, or the death or disability of an employee, that occurs at least 6 months after the grant date, RSUs receive accelerated vesting as to some or all of the RSUs. The 2005 Plan also contains provisions regarding grants of equity compensation to the non-employee members of the Board of Directors. The 2005 Plan expires on May 18, 2015, except as to any grants then outstanding.

The number of shares of common stock available for grant under the 2005 Plan is subject to an aggregate limit of 50 million shares and is further subject to share-counting rules as provided in the 2005 Plan. As a result of such share-counting rules, full-value grants such as grants of restricted stock or RSUs count against shares remaining available for grant at a higher rate than grants of stock options and stock appreciation rights. Each stock option or stock appreciation right grant is treated as using one available share for each share actually subject to such grant, whereas each full-value grant is treated as using three available shares for each share actually subject to such full-value grant. The 2005 Plan contains detailed provisions with regard to share-counting. At December 31, 2009, there were approximately 8 million shares of common stock available for grant remaining under the 2005 Plan.

As of December 31, 2009, total unrecognized compensation cost related to unvested share-based payments totaled $69.8 million and is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.0 years.

Mattel recognized compensation expense of $13.0 million, $9.5 million, and $7.4 million for stock options during 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, which is included within other selling and administrative expenses. Income tax benefits related to stock option compensation expense recognized in the consolidated statements of operations during 2009, 2008, and 2007 totaled $4.4 million, $3.2 million, and $2.5 million, respectively.

The fair value of options granted has been estimated using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The expected life of the options used in this calculation is the period of time the options are expected to be outstanding, and has been determined based on historical exercise experience. Expected stock price volatility is based on the historical volatility of Mattel’s stock for a period approximating the expected life, the expected dividend yield is based on Mattel’s most recent actual annual dividend payout, and the risk-free interest rate is based on the implied yield available on US Treasury zero-coupon issues approximating the expected life. The following weighted average assumptions were used in determining the fair value of options granted:

The following is a summary of stock option information and weighted average exercise prices for Mattel’s stock options (amounts in thousands, except weighted average exercise price):

The intrinsic value of a stock option is the amount by which the current market value of the underlying stock exceeds the exercise price of an option. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during 2009, 2008, and 2007 was $12.4 million, $12.5 million, and $119.3 million, respectively. At December 31, 2009, options outstanding had an intrinsic value of $47.3 million, with a weighted average remaining life of 5.5 years. At December 31, 2009, options exercisable had an intrinsic value of $38.5 million, with a weighted average remaining life of 4.4 years. The weighted average grant date fair value of options granted during 2009, 2008, and 2007, was $3.71, $3.67, and $4.76, respectively. At December 31, 2009, total stock options vested or expected to vest totaled 24.9 million shares, with a total intrinsic value of $46.8 million, weighted average exercise price of $18.45, and weighted average remaining life of 5.6 years. During 2009, 3.2 million stock options vested. The total grant date fair value of stock options vested during 2009, 2008, and 2007 totaled $12.7 million, $7.5 million, and $5.3 million, respectively.

Mattel uses treasury shares purchased under its share repurchase program to satisfy stock option exercises. Cash received from stock options exercised during 2009, 2008, and 2007 was $30.9 million, $18.3 million, and $222.6 million, respectively.

RSUs are valued at the market value on the date of grant and the expense is evenly attributed to the periods in which the restrictions lapse, which is three years from the date of grant.

Compensation expense recognized related to grants of RSUs was $31.7 million, $24.7 million, and $14.8 million in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, and is included within other selling and administrative expenses. Income tax benefits related to RSU compensation expense recognized in the consolidated statements of operations during 2009, 2008, and 2007 totaled $9.5 million, $7.9 million, and $4.6 million, respectively.

The following table summarizes the number and weighted average grant date fair value of Mattel’s unvested RSUs during the year (amounts in thousands, except weighted average grant date fair value):

At December 31, 2009, total RSUs expected to vest totaled 4.1 million shares, with a weighted average grant date fair value of $19.42. The total grant date fair value of RSUs vested during 2009, 2008, and 2007 totaled $29.5 million, $16.7 million, and $0.4 million, respectively.

In addition to the expense and share amounts described above, Mattel recognized compensation expense of $5.3 million and $1.5 million, during 2009 and 2008, respectively, for performance RSUs granted in connection with its January 1, 2008–December 31, 2010 Long-Term Incentive Program, as more fully described in “Note 7 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Employee Benefit Plans.”

Effective January 1, 2009, Mattel adopted ASC 815-10 (formerly SFAS No. 161, Disclosures about Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, an amendment of FASB Statement No. 133). ASC 815-10 amends and expands the current disclosure requirements to provide users of financial statements with an enhanced understanding of (i) how and why an entity uses derivative instruments, (ii) how derivative instruments and related hedged items are accounted for, and (iii) how derivative instruments and related hedged items affect an entity’s financial position, results of operations, and cash flows. The adoption of this standard had no impact on Mattel’s financial statements.

Mattel seeks to mitigate its exposure to foreign currency transaction risk by monitoring its foreign currency transaction exposure for the year and partially hedging such exposure using foreign currency forward exchange contracts. Mattel uses foreign currency forward exchange contracts as cash flow hedges primarily to hedge its purchases and sales of inventory denominated in foreign currencies. These contracts generally have maturity dates up to 18 months. These derivative instruments have been designated as effective cash flow hedges, whereby the unsettled hedges are reported in Mattel’s consolidated balance sheets at fair value, with changes in the fair value of the hedges reflected in other comprehensive income (“OCI”). Realized gains and losses for these contracts are recorded in the consolidated statements of operations in the period in which the inventory is sold to customers. Additionally, Mattel uses foreign currency forward exchange contracts to hedge intercompany loans and advances denominated in foreign currencies. Due to the short-term nature of the contracts involved, Mattel does not use hedge accounting for these contracts, and as such, changes in fair value are recorded in the period of change in the consolidated statements of operations. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, Mattel held foreign currency forward exchange contracts with notional amounts of $962.9 million and $888.1 million, respectively, which was equal to the exposure hedged.

In connection with the issuance of its $100.0 million of Floating Rate Senior Notes, Mattel entered into two interest rate swap agreements, each in a notional amount of $50.0 million, for the purpose of hedging the variability of cash flows in the interest payments due to fluctuations of the LIBOR benchmark interest rate. The two interest rate swap agreements expired in June 2009, which corresponded with the maturity of the Floating

Rate Senior Notes. These derivative instruments were designated as effective cash flow hedges, whereby the hedges were reported in Mattel’s consolidated balance sheets at fair value, with changes in the fair value of the hedges reflected in OCI. Under the terms of the agreements, Mattel received quarterly interest payments from the swap counterparties based on the three-month LIBOR plus 40 basis points and made semi-annual interest payments to the swap counterparties based on a fixed rate of 5.871%. The three-month LIBOR used to determine interest payments under the interest rate swap agreements had reset every three months, matching the variable interest on the Floating Rate Senior Notes.

The following table presents Mattel’s derivative assets and liabilities at December 31, 2009 (in thousands):

The following tables present the location and amount of gains and losses, net of taxes, from derivatives reported in the consolidated statements of operations in 2009:

The net loss of $9.8 million reclassified from accumulated OCI to the consolidated statements of operations during 2009, are offset by the changes in cash flows associated with the underlying hedged transactions.

The net gains of $20.8 million recognized in the consolidated statements of operations during 2009 are offset by foreign currency transaction losses on the related hedged balances.

The following table presents information about Mattel’s assets and liabilities measured and reported in the financial statements at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2009 and indicates the fair value hierarchy of the valuation techniques utilized to determine such fair value. The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:

Mattel does not have any significant financial assets or liabilities measured at fair value using Level 1 or Level 3 inputs as of December 31, 2009 or December 31, 2008. Mattel’s financial assets and liabilities measured using Level 2 inputs include the following:

Mattel’s financial instruments include cash and equivalents, investments, accounts receivable and payable, short-term borrowings, and accrued liabilities. The carrying amount of these instruments approximates fair value because of their short-term nature.

The estimated fair value of Mattel’s long-term debt, including the current portion, is $794.7 million (compared to a carrying amount of $750.0 million) as of December 31, 2009 and $853.5 million (compared to a carrying amount of $900.0 million) as of December 31, 2008. The estimated fair value has been calculated based on broker quotes or rates for the same or similar instruments.

The fair value related disclosures for Mattel’s derivative financial instruments are included in “Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Derivative Instruments” and “Note 12 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Fair Value Measurements.”

Mattel routinely enters into noncancelable lease agreements for premises and equipment used in the normal course of business. Certain of these leases include escalation clauses that adjust rental expense to reflect changes in price indices, as well as renewal options. In addition to minimum rental payments, certain of Mattel’s leases require additional payments to reimburse the lessors for operating expenses such as real estate taxes, maintenance, utilities, and insurance. Rental expense is recorded on a straight-line basis, including escalating minimum payments. The American Girl Place^® leases in Chicago, Illinois, New York, New York, and Los Angeles, California and American Girl Boutique and Bistro^® leases in Dallas, Texas, Atlanta, Georgia, Natick, Massachusetts, Bloomington, Minnesota, and Denver, Colorado also contain provisions for additional rental payments based on a percentage of the sales of each store after reaching certain sales benchmarks. Contingent rental expense is recorded in the period in which the contingent event becomes probable. The following table shows the future minimum obligations under lease commitments in effect at December 31, 2009:

Rental expense under operating leases amounted to $121.9 million, $105.3 million, and $93.0 million for 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, net of sublease income of $0.1 million, $0.7 million, and $1.0 million in 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

In the normal course of business, Mattel enters into contractual arrangements to obtain and protect Mattel’s right to create and market certain products, and for future purchases of goods and services to ensure availability and timely delivery. Such arrangements include royalty payments pursuant to licensing agreements and commitments for future inventory purchases. Certain of these commitments routinely contain provisions for guarantees or minimum expenditures during the term of the contracts. Current and future commitments for guaranteed payments reflect Mattel’s focus on expanding its product lines through alliances with businesses in other industries.

Licensing and similar agreements provide for terms extending from 2010 through 2014 and thereafter and contain provisions for future minimum payments as shown in the following table:

Royalty expense for 2009, 2008, and 2007 was $188.5 million, $241.2 million, and $243.3 million, respectively.

As of December 31, 2009, Mattel had approximately $267 million of outstanding commitments for purchases of inventory, other assets, and services in fiscal year 2009.

Mattel has a wholly owned subsidiary, Far West Insurance Company, Ltd. (“Far West”), that was established to insure Mattel’s workers’ compensation, general, automobile, and product liability risks. Far West insures the first $1.0 million per occurrence of Mattel’s workers’ compensation, the first $0.5 million for general and automobile liability risks, and the first $2.0 million per occurrence of product liability risks. Various insurance companies, that have an “A” or better AM Best rating at the time the policies are purchased, reinsure Mattel’s risk in excess of the amounts insured by Far West. Mattel’s liability for reported and incurred but not reported claims at December 31, 2009 and 2008 totaled $17.4 million and $18.3 million, respectively, and is included in other noncurrent liabilities. Loss reserves are accrued based on Mattel’s estimate of the aggregate liability for claims incurred.

With regard to the claims against Mattel described below, Mattel intends to defend itself vigorously. Except as more fully described in “Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements—Product Recalls and Withdrawals,” management cannot reasonably determine the scope or amount of possible liabilities that could result from an unfavorable settlement or resolution of these claims, and no reserves for these claims have been established as of December 31, 2009. However, it is possible that an unfavorable resolution of these claims could have a material adverse effect on Mattel’s financial condition and results of operations, and there can be no assurance that Mattel will be able to achieve a favorable settlement or resolution of these claims.

In April 2004, Mattel filed a lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court against Carter Bryant (“Bryant”), a former Mattel design employee. The suit alleges that Bryant aided and assisted a Mattel competitor, MGA Entertainment, Inc. (“MGA”), during the time he was employed by Mattel, in violation of his contractual and other duties to Mattel. In September 2004, Bryant asserted counterclaims against Mattel, including counterclaims in which Bryant sought, as a putative class action representative, to invalidate Mattel’s Confidential Information and Proprietary Inventions Agreements with its employees. Bryant also removed Mattel’s suit to the United States District Court for the Central District of California. In December 2004, MGA intervened as a party-defendant in Mattel’s action against Bryant, asserting that its rights to Bratz properties are at stake in the litigation.

Separately, in November 2004, Bryant filed an action against Mattel in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The action sought a judicial declaration that Bryant’s purported conveyance of rights in Bratz was proper and that he did not misappropriate Mattel property in creating Bratz.

In April 2005, MGA filed suit against Mattel in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. MGA’s action alleges claims of trade dress infringement, trade dress dilution, false designation of origin, unfair competition, and unjust enrichment. The suit alleges, among other things, that certain products, themes, packaging, and/or television commercials in various Mattel product lines have infringed upon products, themes, packaging, and/or television commercials for various MGA product lines, including Bratz. The complaint also asserts that various alleged Mattel acts with respect to unidentified retailers, distributors, and licensees have damaged MGA and that various alleged acts by industry organizations, purportedly induced by Mattel, have damaged MGA. MGA’s suit alleges that MGA has been damaged in an amount “believed to reach or exceed tens of millions of dollars” and further seeks punitive damages, disgorgement of Mattel’s profits and injunctive relief.

In June 2006, the three cases were consolidated in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. On July 17, 2006, the Court issued an order dismissing all claims that Bryant had asserted against Mattel, including Bryant’s purported counterclaims to invalidate Mattel’s Confidential Information and Proprietary Inventions Agreements with its employees, and Bryant’s claims for declaratory relief. Mattel believes the remaining MGA claims against it are without merit and intends to continue to vigorously defend against them.

In November 2006, Mattel asked the Court for leave to file an Amended Complaint that included not only additional claims against Bryant, but also included claims for copyright infringement, RICO violations, misappropriation of trade secrets, intentional interference with contract, aiding and abetting breach of fiduciary duty and breach of duty of loyalty, and unfair competition, among others, against MGA, its CEO Isaac Larian, certain MGA affiliates and an MGA employee. The bases for the Amended Complaint included the MGA defendants’ infringement of Mattel’s copyrights and their pattern of misappropriation of trade secrets and unfair competition in violation of the applicable statutes. On January 12, 2007, the Court granted Mattel leave to file these claims as counterclaims in the consolidated cases, which Mattel did that same day.

In February 2007, the Court decided that the consolidated cases would be tried in two phases, with the first trial to determine claims and defenses related to Mattel’s ownership of Bratz works and whether MGA infringed those works. The second trial, which has not yet been scheduled, will consider both Mattel’s separate claims for misappropriation of trade secrets and violations of the RICO statute, among other things, and MGA’s various claims for unfair competition. In May 2009, Mattel obtained leave to file a Third Amended Answer and Counterclaims in the litigation in connection with the claims to be tried as part of the second phase.

On May 19, 2008, Bryant reached a settlement agreement with Mattel and is no longer a defendant in the litigation. In the public stipulation entered by Mattel and Bryant in connection with the resolution, Bryant agreed that he was and would continue to be bound by all prior and future Court Orders relating to Bratz ownership and infringement, including the Court’s summary judgment rulings.

The first phase of the first trial, which began on May 27, 2008, resulted in a unanimous jury verdict on July 17, 2008 in favor of Mattel, finding that almost all of the Bratz design drawings and other works in question were created by Bryant while he was employed at Mattel. Among other things, the jury determined that MGA and Isaac Larian intentionally interfered with the contractual duties owed by Bryant to Mattel, aided and abetted Bryant’s breaches of his duty of loyalty to Mattel, aided and abetted Bryant’s breaches of the fiduciary duties he owed to Mattel, and converted Mattel property for their own use.

In the second phase of the first trial, which began on July 23, 2008, the same jury determined the amount of damages to award to Mattel for MGA’s and Isaac Larian’s conversion, intentional interference with Bryant’s contractual duties, and aiding and abetting Bryant’s breaches of his fiduciary duties and duty of loyalty to Mattel. In addition, the jury determined if Bratz dolls and related products infringe on the Bratz drawings and other works owned by Mattel, what damages to assess for such infringement, and whether certain defenses asserted by MGA have merit. The jury was instructed that if it found infringement, it was to determine the amount of damages to be awarded to Mattel due to the infringement. On August 26, 2008, the jury rendered a unanimous verdict for Mattel in the second phase of the trial. The jury found that defendants MGA, Larian, and MGA Entertainment (HK) Limited infringed Mattel’s copyrights in the Bratz design drawings and other Bratz works. The jury awarded Mattel total damages of approximately $100 million against the defendants for the copyright infringement claim and the claims that the defendants intentionally interfered with Bryant’s contract, aided and abetted Bryant’s breach of his fiduciary duty and duty of loyalty to Mattel, and converted Mattel’s property for their own use.

Post-trial, Mattel moved the Court to enjoin MGA from producing infringing products in the future. Mattel also asked the Court to award to Mattel certain rights in the term “Bratz”, which the jury found Bryant had conceived and created while a Mattel employee. Mattel also moved the Court to enter declaratory relief

confirming, among other things, Mattel’s rights in the Bratz works found by the jury to have been created by Bryant during his Mattel employment. MGA filed motions as well, including a motion that asserted the Court should rule for MGA on equitable affirmative defenses such as laches, waiver and estoppel against Mattel’s claims. On December 3, 2008, the Court issued a series of orders rejecting MGA’s equitable defenses and granting Mattel’s motions, including an order enjoining the MGA party defendants from manufacturing, marketing, or selling certain Bratz fashion dolls or from using the “Bratz” name. The Court stayed the effect of the December 3, 2008 injunctive orders until further order of the Court and entered a further specified stay of the injunctive orders on January 7, 2009.

The parties filed and argued additional motions for post-trial relief, including a request by MGA to enter judgment as a matter of law on Mattel’s claims in MGA’s favor and to reduce the jury’s damages award to Mattel. Mattel additionally moved for the appointment of a receiver. On April 27, 2009, the Court entered an order confirming that Bratz works found by the jury to have been created by Bryant during his Mattel employment are and were Mattel’s property and that hundreds of Bratz female fashion dolls infringe Mattel’s copyrights. The Court also upheld the jury’s award of damages in the amount of $100 million and ordered an accounting of post-trial Bratz sales. The Court further vacated the stay of the December 3, 2008 orders, except to the extent specified by the Court’s January 7, 2009 modification. Finally, the Court appointed a temporary receiver with powers to manage, supervise and oversee the Bratz brand and assets of the MGA entities. The temporary receivership was subsequently terminated, and the Court appointed a monitor in lieu of a receiver to facilitate implementation and enforcement of the injunctive orders.

MGA appealed the Court’s equitable orders to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. In May 2009, MGA also sought an immediate stay of the equitable orders from the Ninth Circuit pending appeal. The Ninth Circuit denied that stay request. On December 9, 2009, the Ninth Circuit heard oral argument on MGA’s appeal and issued an order staying the District Court’s equitable orders pending a further order to be issued by the Ninth Circuit. The Ninth Circuit has not yet issued an order on the merits of the appeal. On December 14, 2009, the District Court stayed the appointment of the monitor charged with facilitating implementation and enforcement of the injunctive orders.

Twenty-two lawsuits have been filed in the United States asserting claims arising out of the August 2, August 14, September 4, and/or October 25, 2007 voluntary product recalls by Mattel and Fisher-Price, as well as the withdrawal of red and green toy blood pressure cuffs from retail stores or their replacement at the request of consumers.

Eighteen of those cases were commenced in the following United States District Courts: ten in the Central District of California (Mayhew v. Mattel, filed August 7, 2007; White v. Mattel, filed August 16, 2007; Luttenberger v. Mattel, filed August 23, 2007; Puerzer v. Mattel, filed August 29, 2007; Shah v. Fisher-Price, filed September 13, 2007; Rusterholtz v. Mattel, filed September 27, 2007; Jimenez v. Mattel, filed October 12, 2007; Probst v. Mattel, filed November 5, 2007; Entsminger v. Mattel, filed November 9, 2007; and White v. Mattel, filed November 26, 2007, hereinafter, “White II”); three in the Southern District of New York (Shoukry v. Fisher-Price, filed August 10, 2007; Goldman v. Fisher-Price, filed August 31, 2007; and Allen v. Fisher-Price, filed November 16, 2007); two in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Monroe v. Mattel, filed August 17, 2007, and Chow v. Mattel, filed September 7, 2007); one in the Southern District of Indiana (Sarjent v. Fisher-Price, filed August 16, 2007); one in the District of South Carolina (Hughey v. Fisher-Price, filed August 24, 2007); and one in the Eastern District of Louisiana (Sanders v. Mattel, filed November 14, 2007). Two other actions originally filed in Los Angeles County Superior Court were removed to federal court in the Central District of California (Healy v. Mattel, filed August 21, 2007, and Powell v. Mattel, filed August 20, 2007). Another lawsuit commenced in San Francisco County Superior Court was removed to the federal court in

the Northern District of California (Harrington v. Mattel, filed August 20, 2007). One other action was commenced in District of Columbia Superior Court and removed to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (DiGiacinto v. Mattel, filed August 29, 2007). Mattel was named as a defendant in all of the actions, while Fisher-Price was named as a defendant in nineteen of the cases.

On September 5, 2007, Mattel and Fisher-Price filed a motion before the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (“JPML”) asking that all federal actions related to the recalls be coordinated and transferred to the Central District of California (In re Mattel Inc. Toy Lead Paint Products Liability Litigation). On December 18, 2007, the JPML issued a transfer order, transferring six actions pending outside the Central District of California (Sarjent, Shoukry, Goldman, Monroe, Chow and Hughey) to the Central District of California for coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with five actions pending in the Central District (Mayhew, White, Luttenberger, Puerzer and Shah). The remaining cases (Healy, Powell, Rusterholtz, Jiminez, Probst, Harrington, DiGiacinto, Allen, Sanders, Entsminger, and White II ), so-called “potential tag-along actions,” are either already pending in the Central District of California or have been transferred there pursuant to January 3 and January 17, 2008 conditional transfer orders issued by the JPML. These matters are all currently pending in In re Mattel, Inc. Toy Lead Paint Products Liability Litigation, No. 2:07-ML-01897-DSF-AJW, MDL 1897 (C. D. Ca.) (the “MDL proceeding”).

On March 31, 2008, plaintiffs filed a Consolidated Amended Class Action Complaint in the MDL proceeding, which was followed with a Second Consolidated Amended Complaint (the “Consolidated Complaint”), filed on May 16, 2008. Plaintiffs seek certification of a class of all persons who, from May 2003 through the present, purchased and/or acquired certain allegedly hazardous toys. The Consolidated Complaint defines hazardous toys as those toys recalled between August 2, 2007 and October 25, 2007, due to the presence of lead in excess of applicable standards in the paint on some parts of some of the toys; those toys recalled on November 21, 2006 and August 14, 2007, related to magnets; and the red and green toy blood pressure cuffs voluntarily withdrawn from retail stores or replaced at the request of consumers. Defendants named in the Consolidated Complaint are Mattel, Fisher-Price, Target Corporation, Toys “R” Us, Inc., Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., KB Toys, Inc., and Kmart Corporation. Mattel has assumed the defense of Target Corporation, Toys “R” Us, Inc., KB Toys, Inc., and Kmart Corporation, and agreed to indemnify all of the retailer defendants, for the specific claims raised in the Consolidated Complaint, which claims relate to the sale of Mattel and Fisher-Price toys.

In the Consolidated Complaint, plaintiffs assert claims for breach of implied and express warranties, negligence, strict liability, violation of the United States Consumer Product Safety Act (“CPSA”) and related Consumer Product Safety Rules, various California consumer protection statutes, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiffs seek (i) declaratory and injunctive relief enjoining defendants from continuing the allegedly unlawful practices raised in the Consolidated Complaint; (ii) restitution and disgorgement of monies acquired by defendants from the allegedly unlawful practices; (iii) costs of initial diagnostic blood lead level testing to detect possible injury to plaintiffs and members of the class; (iv) costs of treatment for those who test positive to the initial diagnostic blood lead level testing; (v) reimbursement of the purchase price for the allegedly hazardous toys; and (vi) costs and attorneys’ fees. On June 24, 2008, defendants filed motions to dismiss the Consolidated Complaint. On November 24, 2008, the Court granted defendants’ motion with respect to plaintiffs’ claims under the CPSA related to the magnet toys and the toy blood pressure cuffs and denied defendants’ motions in all other respects.

On October 13, 2009, plaintiffs and Mattel filed a joint motion with the Court seeking preliminary approval of a class action settlement of the MDL proceeding, which the Court granted on October 23, 2009. Pursuant to the Court’s order of preliminary approval, the parties have implemented the settlement, and will seek final approval from the Court on March 15, 2010. Upon such final approval, Mattel and the other defendants in the MDL proceeding will be released from all claims arising out of the lead- and magnet-related recalls (except for

any individual personal injury claims). Under the settlement, Mattel has agreed, among other things, to provide various categories of economic relief for members of the settlement class, maintain a quality assurance system and make a charitable contribution to fund child safety programs. In addition, Mattel has agreed not to object to plaintiffs’ counsel’s application to the Court for attorneys’ fees and expenses up to a specified amount.

Since September 26, 2007, eight proposed class actions have been filed in the provincial superior courts of the following Canadian provinces: British Columbia (Trainor v. Fisher-Price, filed September 26, 2007); Alberta (Cairns v. Fisher-Price, filed September 26, 2007); Saskatchewan (Sharp v. Mattel Canada, filed September 26, 2007); Quebec (El-Mousfi v. Mattel Canada, filed September 27, 2007, and Fortier v. Mattel Canada, filed October 10, 2007); Ontario (Wiggins v. Mattel Canada, filed September 28, 2007); New Brunswick (Travis v. Fisher-Price, filed September 28, 2007); and Manitoba (Close v. Fisher-Price, filed October 3, 2007). Mattel, Fisher-Price, and Mattel Canada are defendants in all of the actions, and Fisher-Price Canada is a defendant in two of the actions (El-Mousfi and Wiggins). All but one of the cases seek certification of both a class of residents of that province and a class of all other residents of Canada outside the province where the action was filed. The classes are generally defined similarly in all of the actions to include both purchasers of the toys recalled by Mattel and Fisher-Price in August and September 2007 and children, either directly or through their parents as “next friends,” who have had contact with those toys.

The actions in Canada generally allege that defendants were negligent in allowing their products to be manufactured and sold with lead paint on the toys and negligent in the design of the toys with small magnets, which led to the sale of defective products. The cases typically state claims in four categories: (i) production of a defective product; (ii) misrepresentations; (iii) negligence; and (iv) violations of consumer protection statutes. Plaintiffs generally seek general and special damages, damages in the amount of monies paid for testing of children based on alleged exposure to lead, restitution of any amount of monies paid for replacing recalled toys, disgorgement of benefits resulting from recalled toys, aggravated and punitive damages, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, and an award of litigation costs and attorneys’ fees. Plaintiffs in all of the actions except one do not specify the amount of damages sought. In the Ontario action (Wiggins), plaintiff demands general damages of Canadian dollar $75 million and special damages of Canadian dollar $150 million, in addition to the other remedies. In November 2007, the class action suit commenced by Mr. Fortier was voluntarily discontinued.

After the discontinuance of his class action suit, Mr. Fortier filed an individual action in Quebec (Fortier v. Mattel Canada, Inc., filed on November 22, 2007). In his individual action, Mr. Fortier alleges that he purchased recalled toys and, as a result, suffered damages, including consequential and incidental damages such as worry, concern, and costs of the products and replacement products, medicines, diagnosis, and treatment. Mr. Fortier alleges damages of Canadian dollar $5 million. Mattel moved to stay Mr. Fortier’s individual action pending resolution of the request to proceed as a class action filed in the El-Mousfi action also pending in Quebec, and that motion to stay was denied. In December 2009, the Quebec court granted plaintiff’s request in the El-Mousfi action to discontinue that proceeding.

Three consumer protection associations and agencies have filed claims against Mattel’s subsidiary Mattel do Brasil Ltda. in the following courts in Brazil: (a) the Public Treasury Court in the State of Santa Catarina (Associacao Catarinense de Defesa dos Cidadaos, dos Consumidores e dos Contribuintes (“ACC/SC”)—ACC/SC v. Mattel do Brasil Ltda., filed on February 2, 2007); (b) the Second Commercial Court in the State of Rio de Janeiro (Consumer Protection Committee of the Rio de Janeiro State Legislative Body (“CPLeg/ RJ”)—CPLeg/RJ v. Mattel do Brasil Ltda., filed on August 17, 2007); and (c) the Sixth Civil Court of the

Federal District (Brazilian Institute for the Study and Defense of Consumer Relationships (“IBEDEC”)—IBEDEC v. Mattel do Brasil Ltda., filed on September 13, 2007). The ACC/SC case is related to the recall of magnetic products in November 2006; the CPLeg/RJ case is related to the August 2007 recall of magnetic products; and the IBEDEC case is related to the August and September 2007 recalls of magnetic products and products with non-approved paint containing lead exceeding the limits established by applicable regulations and Mattel standards. The cases generally state claims in four categories: (i) production of a defective product; (ii) misrepresentations; (iii) negligence; and (iv) violations of consumer protection statutes. Plaintiffs generally seek general and special damages; restitution of monies paid by consumers to replace recalled toys; disgorgement of benefits resulting from recalled toys; aggravated and punitive damages; pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; injunctive relief; and litigation costs and attorneys’ fees. The amount of damages sought by plaintiffs is not generally specified, except that in the Public Treasury Court in the State of Santa Catarina action, ACC/SC demands general damages of approximately $1 million, in addition to other remedies, and in the Sixth Civil Court of the Federal District action, IBEDEC estimated the amount of approximately $21 million, as a basis for calculating court fees, in addition to requesting other remedies.

On June 18, 2008, the court held that the action brought by IBEDEC was without merit, and on July 1, 2008, IBEDEC filed an appeal. On July 23, 2008, Mattel do Brasil submitted its appellate brief. On September 15, 2008, the Public Prosecutor’s Office submitted its opinion to the court, which supported upholding the original decision, given that no reason had been cited for ordering the company to pay pain and suffering damages. Moreover, just as the judge had done, the Public Prosecutor’s Office determined that the mere recall of products does not trigger any obligation to indemnify any party. On November 4, 2008, the panel of three appellate judges unanimously upheld the lower court’s decision. On November 18, 2008, IBEDEC filed a special appeal and on January 5, 2009 Mattel do Brasil filed its response. On February 2, 2009, the special appeal lodged by IBEDEC was rejected. In February, 2009, IBEDEC filed a new interlocutory appeal, and on March 16, 2009, Mattel do Brasil presented its counter arguments to the IBEDEC interlocutory appeal. On December 7, 2009, the Federal Superior Court (STJ) published a decision denying IBEDEC’s appeal. Currently Mattel do Brasil is awaiting IBEDEC to file a motion seeking to have some issue in the decision clarified.

On July 9, 2008, the court also rendered a decision concerning the action brought by CPLeg/RJ. The judge rejected the claim for general damages, but Mattel do Brasil was ordered to provide product-exchange outlets in certain locations for replacement of the recalled products, to publish in newspapers the provisions of the court decision, and to make available on its website the addresses of the outlets for replacement of recalled products and the provisions of the court’s decision. The decision also allowed the consumers who were affected by the recall to submit information to the court, so that the applicability of pecuniary damages can be analyzed

later, on a case by case basis. It finally ordered Mattel do Brasil to pay attorneys’ fees in an amount equal to 10% of the value placed on the claim (with a value placed on the claim of approximately $12,500). Mattel do Brasil filed a motion seeking to resolve apparent discrepancies in the court’s decision, but the judge sustained the decision, as rendered, and Mattel do Brasil filed its appeal of such decision. On September 19, 2008, the appeals court accepted Mattel’s appeal for purposes of remand, only, and not to stay the proceedings. Seeking to prevent execution on the judgment, Mattel do Brasil filed an interlocutory appeal and requested the court grant a preliminary injunction. On October 14, 2008 the injunction was granted. On February 5, 2009, the court heard the interlocutory appeal and confirmed the injunction. On September 1, 2009, the appeals court in Rio de Janeiro unanimously reversed the judgment issued by the lower court. Therefore, Mattel do Brasil is not required to establish outlets in each city of the State of Rio de Janeiro for purposes of further conducting the magnet and lead recalls. Mattel do Brasil expects Codecon to present a special appeal.

Since August 20, 2007, the Department of Consumer Protection and Defense (“DPDC”), the Consumer Protection Office (“PROCON”) of São Paulo, Mato Grosso and Rio de Janeiro, and public prosecutors from the States of Pernambuco, Rio Grande do Norte, and Rio de Janeiro have brought eight administrative proceedings against Mattel do Brasil, alleging that the company offered products whose risks to consumers’ health and safety should have been known by Mattel. The proceedings have been filed with the following administrative courts:

(a) DPDC (DPDC v. Mattel do Brasil Ltda., filed on August 20, 2007, and DPDC v. Mattel do Brasil Ltda., filed on September 14, 2007); (b) PROCON (PROCON/MT v. Mattel do Brasil, filed on August 29, 2007, PROCON/SP v. Mattel do Brasil, filed on September 4, 2007, and PROCON/RJ v. Mattel do Brasil, filed on August 27, 2007); and (c) the Public Prosecutor’s Office (MP/RJ v. Mattel do Brasil, filed on September 27, 2007, MP/PE v. Mattel do Brasil, filed on September 28, 2007, and MP/RN v. Mattel do Brasil, filed on October 10, 2007). The administrative proceedings generally state claims based on the alleged negligence of Mattel do Brasil regarding recalled products. In the PROCON/SP proceeding, plaintiff estimated a fine equivalent to approximately $400,000. None of the other administrative proceedings listed above specify the amount of the penalties that could be applied if the claims against Mattel do Brasil are successful. On December 21, 2007, PROCON/SP rendered a decision and decided to impose a fine on Mattel do Brasil in the approximate amount of $200,000. On January 9, 2008, Mattel do Brasil filed an administrative appeal regarding the decision of December 21, 2007. On January 29, 2009, the administrative appeal was not granted and as a consequence Mattel do Brasil decided to pursue further adjudication of this matter in the Brazilian courts.

All of the actions in Brazil are progressing and are at various stages of adjudication as described above.

In late November 2009, five proposed class actions were filed in provincial superior courts in five different Canadian provinces against Fisher-Price, Inc. and Fisher-Price Canada Inc. alleging claims based on alleged manufacturing defects in drop-side cribs manufactured by Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. (“Stork Craft”) between 1993 and 2009, including Fisher-Price branded drop-side cribs manufactured and sold by Stork Craft pursuant to a License Agreement with Fisher-Price, Inc. These claims follow product recalls of Stork Craft-manufactured drop-side cribs in the United States and Canada. Stork Craft and the corporate entities of a number of retailers, including Wal-Mart, Sears, The Bay and Toys R’ Us, also have been named as defendants in the proposed class actions. The five proposed class actions are: Cedar Dodd v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. et al., filed in the Supreme Court of British Columbia on November 24, 2009, Victoria Registry, Action No. 09 5327; Amy St. Pierre et al. v. Fisher-Price Canada Inc., et al., filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Alberta on November 24, 2009, Judicial District of Calgary, Action No. 0901-17700; Kim Riel v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. et al., filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Saskatchewan, on November 25, 2009, Judicial Centre of Regina, Q.B. No. 1794 of 2009; Tara Russell v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. et al., filed in the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba, on November 25, 2009, Winnipeg Centre, File No. C1 09-01-63980; and David Duong et al. v. Stork Craft Manufacturing Inc. et al., filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice on November 25, 2009, in Ottawa, Court File No. 09-46962.

The five proposed class actions are all brought by the same plaintiff’s law firm and the allegations are essentially the same. Each of the proposed class actions is based on allegation that the drop-side mechanisms used in the Stork Craft cribs are dangerously defective in that they create a risk that infants will be injured as result falling from or becoming entrapped in the crib. The claims are based in negligence, waiver of tort and breach of provincial sale of goods and consumer protection legislation. The claims seek damages for personal injury and economic loss, including recovery of the purchase price paid for the cribs, as well as an accounting, disgorgement or restitution of revenue earned by the defendants from selling the cribs. The claims further seek exemplary, aggravated and punitive damages. No amount of damages is specified in any of the claims, except the Ontario claim which seeks Canadian dollar $1 million in general damages and Canadian dollar $1 million in special damages. Each of the proposed class actions seeks certification on behalf of a class consisting of all persons (except defendants) that owned or purchased the drop-side cribs in question. No motion for certification has yet been filed in any of the actions.

The License Agreement between Fisher-Price and Stork Craft includes an indemnity clause whereby Stork Craft agreed to indemnify Fisher-Price in respect of claims against Fisher-Price relating to Stork Craft manufactured products. While Mattel intends for Fisher-Price to seek indemnity from Stork Craft to cover all costs related to these claims, there can be no assurance that Fisher-Price ultimately would be successful in obtaining full indemnity from Stork Craft.

None of the claims in the five proposed class actions has been served on Fisher-Price and all of the proposed class actions are at a preliminary stage.

Mattel’s operating segments are separately managed business units and are divided on a geographic basis between domestic and international. Mattel’s domestic operating segments include:

Mattel Girls & Boys Brands—including Barbie^® fashion dolls and accessories (“Barbie^®”), Polly Pocket^®, Little Mommy^®, Disney Classics^®, and High School Musical^® (collectively “Other Girls Brands”), Hot Wheels^®, Matchbox^®, Battle Force 5™, Speed Racer^®, and Tyco R/C^® vehicles and play sets (collectively “Wheels”), and CARS™, Radica^®, Toy Story^®, Max Steel^®, Speed Racer^®, Batman^®, and Kung Fu Panda^® products, and games and puzzles (collectively “Entertainment”).

Fisher-Price Brands—including Fisher-Price^®, Little People^®, BabyGear™, and View-Master^® (collectively “Core Fisher-Price^®”), Sesame Street^® , Dora the Explorer^®, Go Diego Go!^®, and See ‘N Say^® (collectively “Fisher-Price^® Friends”), and Power Wheels^® .

Additionally, the International segment sells products in all toy categories, except American Girl Brands.

The following tables present information about revenues, income, and assets by segment. Mattel does not include sales adjustments such as trade discounts and other allowances in the calculation of segment revenues (referred to as “gross sales”). Mattel records these adjustments in its financial accounting systems at the time of sale to each customer, but the adjustments are not allocated to individual products. For this reason, Mattel’s chief operating decision maker uses gross sales by segment as one of the metrics to measure segment performance. Such sales adjustments are included in the determination of segment income from operations based on the adjustments recorded in the financial accounting systems. Segment income from operations represents operating income, while consolidated income from operations represents income from operations before income taxes as reported in the consolidated statements of operations. The corporate and other category includes costs not allocated to individual segments, including charges related to incentive compensation, share-based payments, and corporate headquarters functions managed on a worldwide basis, and the impact of changes in foreign currency rates on intercompany transactions.

Segment assets are comprised of accounts receivable and inventories, net of applicable reserves and allowances.

Mattel sells a broad variety of toy products, which are grouped into three major categories: Mattel Girls & Boys Brands, Fisher-Price Brands, and American Girl Brands. The table below presents worldwide revenues by category:

The tables below present information by geographic area. Revenues are attributed to countries based on location of customer. Long-lived assets principally include goodwill, property, plant, and equipment, net, and identifiable intangibles, net.

Sales to Mattel’s three largest customers accounted for 40%, 38%, and 41% of worldwide consolidated net sales for 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively, as follows:

The Mattel Girls & Boys Brands US and Fisher-Price Brands US segments sell products to each of Mattel’s three largest customers. The International segment sells products to Wal-Mart and Toys “R” Us. The American Girl Brands segment sells its children’s publications to Wal-Mart and Target.

As of December 31, 2009, Mattel’s disclosure controls and procedures were evaluated to provide reasonable assurance that information required to be disclosed by Mattel in the reports that it files or submits under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is accumulated and communicated to management, as appropriate, in a timely manner that would alert them to material information relating to Mattel that would be required to be included in Mattel’s periodic reports and to provide reasonable assurance that such information was recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in Securities and Exchange Commission rules and forms. Based on this evaluation, Robert A. Eckert, Mattel’s principal executive officer, and Kevin M. Farr, Mattel’s principal financial officer, concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures were effective as of December 31, 2009.

The report called for by Item 308(a) of Regulation S-K is incorporated by reference to Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting, included in Part II, Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this report.

The report called for by Item 308(b) of Regulation S-K is incorporated by reference to Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, included in Part II, “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this report.

Mattel continues to implement a conversion to new and upgraded financial and human resources information technology systems that began in the fourth quarter of 2002. Mattel has evaluated the effect on its internal control over financial reporting of this conversion for the three months ended December 31, 2009, and determined that this conversion has not materially affected, and is not reasonably likely to materially affect, Mattel’s internal control over financial reporting. Mattel has not made any significant changes to its internal control over financial reporting or in other factors that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to December 31, 2009.

The information required under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to sections entitled “Proposal 1 —Election of Directors”; “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance”; “The Board of Directors and Corporate Governance—Board Committees—Audit Committee”; and “Report of the Audit Committee” in the Mattel 2010 Notice of Annual Meeting of Stockholders and Proxy Statement to be filed with the SEC within 120 days after December 31, 2009 (the “Proxy Statement”). Information with respect to the executive officers of Mattel appears under the heading “Executive Officers of the Registrant” in Part I herein. Mattel has adopted the Mattel Code of Conduct (the “Code of Conduct”), which satisfies the listing rules of the NASDAQ Stock Market (“NASDAQ”) regarding “code of business conduct and ethics” and satisfies the SEC rules regarding disclosure of a “code of ethics” for the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller. The Code of Conduct is publicly available on Mattel’s corporate website at http://www.mattel.com, and the text of the Code of Conduct will be updated on the website to reflect any amendment. A copy may also be obtained free of charge by mailing a request in writing to: Secretary, Mail Stop M1-1516, Mattel, Inc., 333 Continental Blvd., El Segundo, CA 90245-5012. If Mattel grants any waiver from a provision of the Code of Conduct for any executive officer or director, or makes any substantive amendment to the SEC-mandated “code of ethics” that applies to the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer or Corporate Controller, Mattel will make disclosures to the extent required by applicable laws, regulations and stock exchange listing standards on its corporate website or in a Current Report on Form 8-K. Mattel has posted the Board of Directors’ corporate governance guidelines and the charters of its Audit, Compensation and Governance and Social Responsibility Committees of the Board of Directors on its corporate website at http://www.mattel.com. Copies of the corporate governance guidelines and committee charters may be obtained free of charge by mailing a request to the address noted above.

Mattel has filed the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Section 302 certifications of its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which are attached hereto as Exhibit 31.0 and Exhibit 31.1, respectively.

The information required under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to sections entitled “Compensation Disclosures”; “The Board of Directors and Corporate Governance: (1) Board Committees—Compensation Committee”; and (2) “Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation” in the Proxy Statement.

The information required under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to sections entitled “Principal Stockholders”; “Security Ownership of Management”; and “Compensation Disclosure” in the Proxy Statement.

The information required under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to sections entitled “Certain Transactions with Related Persons”; and “The Board of Directors and Corporate Governance—Director Independence” in the Proxy Statement.

The information required under this Item is incorporated herein by reference to the section entitled “Proposal 3—Ratification of Selection of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in the Proxy Statement.

The following financial statements are filed as part of this report under Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

All other Financial Statement Schedules are omitted because they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto. See Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

Mattel has not filed certain long-term debt instruments under which the principal amount of securities authorized to be issued does not exceed 10% of its total assets. Copies of such agreements will be provided to the SEC upon request.

Copies of this Annual Report on Form 10-K (including Exhibit 24.0) and Exhibits 11.0, 12.0, 21.0, 23.0, 31.0, 31.1 and 32.0 are available to stockholders of Mattel without charge. Copies of other exhibits can be obtained by stockholders of Mattel upon payment of twelve cents per page for such exhibits. Written requests should be sent to: Secretary, Mail Stop M1-1516, Mattel, Inc., 333 Continental Blvd., El Segundo, California 90245-5012.

Pursuant to the requirements of 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.



MATTEL, INC. Registrant

By:		/s/ KEVIN M. FARR

		Kevin M. Farr Chief Financial Officer

We, the undersigned directors and officers of Mattel, Inc. do hereby severally constitute and appoint Robert A. Eckert, Robert Normile, Andrew Paalborg, and Tully M. Friedman, and each of them, our true and lawful attorneys and agents, to do any and all acts and things in our name and behalf in our capacities as directors and officers and to execute any and all instruments for us and in our names in the capacities indicated below, which said attorneys and agents, or any of them, may deem necessary or advisable to enable said Corporation to comply with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and any rules, regulations and requirements of the Securities and Exchange Commission, in connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including specifically, but without limitation, power and authority to sign for us or any of us, in our names in the capacities indicated below, any and all amendments hereto; and we do each hereby ratify and confirm all that said attorneys and agents, or any one of them, shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

Pursuant to the 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.


Delaware		95-1567322
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)		(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)


Title of each class		Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $1.00 par value		The NASDAQ Global Select Market


		Page
	PART I
Item 1.	Business	3

Item 1A.	Risk Factors	12

Item 1B.	Unresolved Staff Comments	20

Item 2.	Properties	20

Item 3.	Legal Proceedings	21

Item 4.	Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders	21

	PART II

Item 5.	Market For Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities	22

Item 6.	Selected Financial Data	25

Item 7.	Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations	26

Item 7A.	Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk	50

Item 8.	Financial Statements and Supplementary Data	53

Item 9.	Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure	102

Item 9A.	Controls and Procedures	102

Item 9B.	Other Information	102

	PART III

Item 10.	Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance	103

Item 11.	Executive Compensation	103

Item 12.	Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters	103

Item 13.	Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence	103

Item 14.	Principal Accountant Fees and Services	103

	PART IV

Item 15.	Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules	104

	Signature	113


	Amount		Percentage of International Gross Sales
	(In millions, except percentage information)
Europe	$	1,442.5	52	%
Latin America		860.5	31
Asia Pacific		267.4	10
Other		187.9	7

	$	2,758.3	100	%


Period	Total Number of Shares (or Units) Purchased	Average Price Paid per Share (or Unit)		Total Number of Shares (or Units) Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs	Maximum Number (or Approximate Dollar Value) of Shares (or Units) that May Yet Be Purchased Under the Plans or Programs
October 1 – 31
Repurchase program (1)	—		—	—	$	410,324,916
Employee transactions (2)	2,130	$	19.19	N/A		N/A
November 1 – 30
Repurchase program (1)	—		—	—	$	410,324,916
Employee transactions (2)	2,209	$	19.56	N/A		N/A
December 1 – 31
Repurchase program (1)	—		—	—	$	410,324,916
Employee transactions (2)	129	$	19.98	N/A		N/A

Total
Repurchase program (1)	—		—	—	$	410,324,916
Employee transactions (2)	4,468	$	19.40	N/A		N/A


Name	Age	Position	Executive Officer Since
Robert A. Eckert	55	Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer	2000
Ellen L. Brothers	54	Executive Vice President of Mattel and President, American Girl	2003
Thomas A. Debrowski	59	Executive Vice President, Worldwide Operations	2000
Kevin M. Farr	52	Chief Financial Officer	1996
Neil B. Friedman	62	President, Mattel Brands	1999
Alan Kaye	56	Senior Vice President, Human Resources	2000
Geoff Massingberd	52	Senior Vice President, Corporate Responsibility	2007
Robert Normile	50	Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary	1999
Bryan Stockton	56	President, International	2000
Dianne Douglas	53	Senior Vice President, Investor Relations and Treasurer	2008
H. Scott Topham	49	Senior Vice President and Corporate Controller	2004


Cumulative Total Return	2005		2006		2007		2008		2009
Mattel, Inc.	$	83.74	$	123.38	$	107.75	$	94.79	$	122.82
S&P 500		104.83		121.20		127.85		81.12		102.15
S&P 500 Consumer Staples		103.55		118.45		135.23		114.65		131.20


	For the Year Ended December 31,
	2009			2008			2007			2006			2005
	(In thousands, except per share and percentage information)
Operating Results:
Net sales	$	5,430,846		$	5,918,002		$	5,970,090		$	5,650,156		$	5,179,016
Gross profit		2,714,697			2,684,406			2,777,300			2,611,793			2,372,868
% of net sales		50.0	%		45.4	%		46.5	%		46.2	%		45.8	%
Operating income		731,168			541,792			730,078			728,818			664,529
% of net sales		13.5	%		9.2	%		12.2	%		12.9	%		12.8	%
Income before income taxes		660,047			487,964			703,398			683,756			652,049
Provision for income taxes (a)		131,343			108,328			103,405			90,829			235,030
Net income	$	528,704		$	379,636		$	599,993		$	592,927		$	417,019
Net income per common share—basic	$	1.45		$	1.04		$	1.55		$	1.54		$	1.02
Net income per common share—diluted	$	1.45		$	1.04		$	1.53		$	1.53		$	1.01
Dividends declared per common share	$	0.75		$	0.75		$	0.75		$	0.65		$	0.50


	December 31,
	2009		2008		2007		2006		2005
	(In thousands)
Financial Position:
Total assets	$	4,780,555	$	4,675,039	$	4,805,455	$	4,955,884	$	4,372,313
Noncurrent liabilities		1,188,692		1,297,930		928,284		940,390		807,395
Stockholders’ equity		2,530,989		2,117,135		2,306,742		2,432,974		2,101,733


	For the Year										Year/Year Change
	2009					2008					Year/Year Change
	Amount			% of Net Sales		Amount			% of Net Sales		%		Basis Points of Net Sales
Net sales	$	5,430.8		100.0	%	$	5,918.0		100.0	%	–8	%

Gross profit	$	2,714.7		50.0	%	$	2,684.4		45.4	%	1	%	460
Advertising and promotion expenses		609.8		11.2			719.2		12.2		–15	%	(100	)
Other selling and administrative expenses		1,373.7		25.3			1,423.4		24.1		–3	%	120

Operating income		731.2		13.5			541.8		9.2		35	%	430
Interest expense		71.8		1.3			81.9		1.4		–12	%	(10	)
Interest (income)		(8.1	)	–0.1			(25.0	)	–0.4		–68	%	30
Other non-operating expense (income), net		7.5					(3.1	)

Income before income taxes	$	660.0		12.2	%	$	488.0		8.2	%	35	%	400


Non-US Regions:	% Change in Gross Sales	Impact of Change in Currency Rates (in % pts)
Total International	–13	–4
Europe	–15	–4
Latin America	–12	–6
Asia Pacific	–7	–2
Other	–11	–1


	Total		2010		2011		2012		2013		2014		Thereafter
	(In millions)
Long-term debt	$	750.0	$	50.0	$	250.0	$	50.0	$	400.0	$	—	$	—
Interest on long-term debt		117.9		44.5		35.0		25.3		13.1		—		—
Capital leases*		3.0		0.3		0.3		0.3		0.3		0.3		1.5
Operating leases		522.0		94.0		79.0		64.0		44.0		36.0		205.0
Purchases of inventory, other assets, and services		267.0		267.0		—		—		—		—		—
Licensing minimum guarantees		241.0		43.0		84.0		45.0		31.0		19.0		19.0
Defined benefit and postretirement benefit plans		349.8		44.7		44.5		28.6		29.5		30.3		172.2

Total	$	2,250.7	$	543.5	$	492.8	$	213.2	$	517.9	$	85.6	$	397.7


	Impairment of Inventory on Hand			Product Returns/ Redemptions			Other			Total
2007 Product Recall charges	$	3,849		$	60,887		$	3,712		$	68,448
Reserves used		(3,849	)		(48,275	)		(1,352	)		(53,476	)

Balance at December 31, 2007		—			12,612			2,360			14,972
2008 Product Withdrawal charges		3,571			5,230			329			9,130
Reserves used		(3,571	)		(15,961	)		(2,013	)		(21,545	)
Changes in estimates		—			1,962			728			2,690
Impact of currency exchange rate changes		—			(238	)		(66	)		(304	)

Balance at December 31, 2008		—			3,605			1,338			4,943
Reserves used		—			(1,297	)		(311	)		(1,608	)
Changes in estimates		—			(2,370	)		707			(1,663	)
Impact of currency exchange rate changes		—			77			(26	)		51

Balance at December 31, 2009	$	—		$	15		$	1,708		$	1,723


	Increase in Assumption Factor		Increase (Decrease) in Fair Value (in % pts)
Expected life (in years)	1 year		3.8
Risk-free interest rate	1	%	6.5
Volatility factor	1	%	3.2
Dividend yield	1	%	(10.8	)

	(Decrease) in Assumption Factor		Increase (Decrease) in Fair Value (in % pts)
Expected life (in years)	(1) year		(5.7	)
Risk-free interest rate	(1	)%	(6.5	)
Volatility factor	(1	)%	(3.5	)
Dividend yield	(1	)%	11.9


	Buy						Sell
	Contract Amount		Weighted Average Contract Rate	Fair Value			Contract Amount		Weighted Average Contract Rate	Fair Value
	(In thousands of US dollars)
Euro*	$	296,827	1.43	$	845		$	320,163	1.38	$	(10,233	)
Canadian dollar*		4,161	0.87		569			37,246	0.87		662
British pound sterling*		—	—		—			16,779	1.61		(108	)
Japanese yen		9,896	89.74		(344	)		19,868	89.88		680
Australian dollar*		32,575	0.88		607			24,364	1.30		(3,480	)
Swiss franc		18,900	1.04		164			—	—		—
Mexican peso		51,277	12.87		(797	)		1,500	14.44		(132	)
Indonesian rupiah		39,040	9,883		1,850			3,020	11,882		(629	)
New Zealand dollar*		9,178	0.71		224			1,769	1.73		(416	)
Czech koruna		5,597	18.35		(17	)		—	—		—
Taiwan dollar		—	—		—			10,233	0.03		(197	)
Singapore dollar		—	—		—			1,019	0.72		8
Hungarian forint		2,879	192.86		73			—	—		—
Polish zloty		9,997	2.93		344			—	—		—
New Turkish lira		—	—		—			5,798	0.65		(79	)

	$	480,327		$	3,518		$	441,759		$	(13,924	)


	December 31, 2009			December 31, 2008
	(In thousands, except share data)
ASSETS
Current Assets
Cash and equivalents	$	1,116,997		$	617,694
Accounts receivable, less allowance of $24.5 million and $25.9 million in 2009 and 2008, respectively		749,335			873,542
Inventories		355,663			485,925
Prepaid expenses and other current assets		332,624			409,689

Total current assets		2,554,619			2,386,850

Property, plant, and equipment, net		504,808			536,162
Goodwill		828,468			815,803
Other noncurrent assets		892,660			936,224

Total Assets	$	4,780,555		$	4,675,039

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
Current Liabilities
Short-term borrowings	$	1,950		$	—
Current portion of long-term debt		50,000			150,000
Accounts payable		350,675			421,736
Accrued liabilities		617,881			649,383
Income taxes payable		40,368			38,855

Total current liabilities		1,060,874			1,259,974

Noncurrent Liabilities
Long-term debt		700,000			750,000
Other noncurrent liabilities		488,692			547,930

Total noncurrent liabilities		1,188,692			1,297,930

Commitments and Contingencies (See Note 14)

Stockholders’ Equity
Common stock $1.00 par value, 1.0 billion shares authorized; 441.4 million shares issued		441,369			441,369
Additional paid-in capital		1,684,694			1,642,092
Treasury stock at cost; 79.5 million shares and 82.9 million shares in 2009 and 2008, respectively		(1,555,046	)		(1,621,264	)
Retained earnings		2,339,506			2,085,573
Accumulated other comprehensive loss		(379,534	)		(430,635	)

Total stockholders’ equity		2,530,989			2,117,135

Total Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity	$	4,780,555		$	4,675,039


	Common Stock		Additional Paid-In Capital			Treasury Stock			Retained Earnings			Accumulated Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income			Total Stockholders’ Equity
	(In thousands)
Balance, December 31, 2006	$	441,369	$	1,613,307		$	(996,981	)	$	1,652,140		$	(276,861	)	$	2,432,974
Comprehensive income:
Net income										599,993						599,993
Change in net unrealized (loss) on derivative instruments													(13,918	)		(13,918	)
Defined benefit pension plans, net prior service cost, and net actuarial loss													28,316			28,316
Currency translation adjustments													86,653			86,653

Comprehensive income										599,993			101,051			701,044
Purchase of treasury stock							(806,349	)								(806,349	)
Issuance of treasury stock for stock option exercises				(5,395	)		225,467									220,072
Other issuance of treasury stock				25			40									65
Restricted stock units				(275	)		266									(9	)
Deferred compensation							6,046									6,046
Share-based compensation				21,870												21,870
Tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements				5,706												5,706
Dividend equivalents for restricted stock units										(2,334	)					(2,334	)
Dividends										(272,343	)					(272,343	)

Balance, December 31, 2007		441,369		1,635,238			(1,571,511	)		1,977,456			(175,810	)		2,306,742
Comprehensive income:
Net income										379,636						379,636
Change in net unrealized gain on derivative instruments													25,388			25,388
Defined benefit pension plans, net prior service cost, and net actuarial loss													(87,636	)		(87,636	)
Currency translation adjustments													(192,577	)		(192,577	)

Comprehensive income										379,636			(254,825	)		124,811
Purchase of treasury stock							(90,570	)								(90,570	)
Issuance of treasury stock for stock option exercises				(10,334	)		28,453									18,119
Other issuance of treasury stock				(1	)		151									150
Restricted stock units				(16,147	)		10,799									(5,348	)
Deferred compensation							1,414									1,414
Share-based compensation				35,639												35,639
Tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements				(2,303	)											(2,303	)
Dividend equivalents for restricted stock units										(2,665	)					(2,665	)
Dividends										(268,854	)					(268,854	)

Balance, December 31, 2008		441,369		1,642,092			(1,621,264	)		2,085,573			(430,635	)		2,117,135
Comprehensive income:
Net income										528,704						528,704
Change in net unrealized (loss) on derivative instruments													(19,805	)		(19,805	)
Defined benefit pension plans, net prior service cost, and net actuarial loss													18,696			18,696
Currency translation adjustments													52,210			52,210

Comprehensive income										528,704			51,101			579,805
Issuance of treasury stock for stock option exercises				(17,219	)		48,115									30,896
Other issuance of treasury stock				(209	)		209									0
Restricted stock units				(26,658	)		18,566									(8,092	)
Deferred compensation							(672	)		(323	)					(995	)
Share-based compensation				49,962												49,962
Tax benefits from share-based payment arrangements				36,726												36,726
Dividend equivalents for restricted stock units										(3,095	)					(3,095	)
Dividends										(271,353	)					(271,353	)

Balance, December 31, 2009	$	441,369	$	1,684,694		$	(1,555,046	)	$	2,339,506		$	(379,534	)	$	2,530,989


	Mattel Girls Brands US Division			Mattel Boys Brands US Division			Fisher- Price Brands US			American Girl Brands		International			Total
	(In thousands)
Balance at December 31, 2007	$	38,751		$	124,469		$	217,383		$	207,571	$	257,475		$	845,649
Additions/Adjustments		—			7,165			—			—		8,105			15,270
Impact of currency exchange rate changes		(9,527	)		(751	)		(1,863	)		—		(32,975	)		(45,116	)

Balance at December 31, 2008		29,224			130,883			215,520			207,571		232,605			815,803
Impact of currency exchange rate changes		2,858			(146	)		560			—		9,393			12,665

Balance at December 31, 2009	$	32,082		$	130,737		$	216,080		$	207,571	$	241,998		$	828,468


	Loss Carryforwards		Tax Credit Carryforwards
	(In thousands)
2010 – 2014	$	55,885	$	69,471
Thereafter		6,606		130,258
No expiration date		81,276		9,443

Total	$	143,767	$	209,172


	Severance			Other termination costs			Total
Charges	$	32,771		$	1,656		$	34,427
Payments		(15,656	)		(775	)		(16,431	)

Balance at December 31, 2008		17,115			881			17,996
Charges		31,176			324			31,500
Payments		(29,508	)		(980	)		(30,488	)

Balance at December 31, 2009	$	18,783		$	225		$	19,008


	For the Year
Basic:	2009			2008			2007
Basic:	(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Net income	$	528,704		$	379,636		$	599,993
Less net income allocable to participating RSUs		(5,992	)		(3,731	)		(4,280	)

Net income available for basic common shares	$	522,712		$	375,905		$	595,713

Weighted average common shares outstanding		360,085			360,757			384,450

Basic net income per common share	$	1.45		$	1.04		$	1.55

Diluted:
Net income	$	528,704		$	379,636		$	599,993
Less net income allocable to participating RSUs		(5,981	)		(3,726	)		(4,258	)

Net income available for diluted common shares	$	522,723		$	375,910		$	595,735

Weighted average common shares outstanding		360,085			360,757			384,450
Weighted average common equivalent shares arising from:
Dilutive stock options and non-participating RSUs		1,425			1,454			4,505

Weighted average number of common and potential common shares		361,510			362,211			388,955

Diluted net income per common share	$	1.45		$	1.04		$	1.53


	Defined Benefit Pension Plans									Postretirement Benefit Plans
	2009			2008			2007			2009			2008		2007
	(In thousands)
Net periodic benefit cost:
Service cost	$	11,153		$	11,989		$	12,305		$	82		$	100	$	99
Interest cost		26,606			26,299			25,327			2,263			2,797		2,832
Expected return on plan assets		(24,330	)		(26,396	)		(25,539	)		—			—		—
Amortization of prior service cost		1,815			1,865			1,919			—			—		—
Recognized actuarial loss		12,502			5,828			8,139			237			513		846

Net periodic benefit cost	$	27,746		$	19,585		$	22,151		$	2,582		$	3,410	$	3,777

Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in other comprehensive income:
Net (gain) loss	$	(26,705	)	$	139,637		$	(40,274	)	$	(3,609	)	$	2,531	$	(2,704	)
Prior service credit		347			(39	)		(124	)		—			—		—
Amortization of prior service cost		(1,815	)		(1,865	)		(1,919	)		—			—		—

Total recognized in other comprehensive income (a)	$	(28,173	)	$	137,733		$	(42,317	)	$	(3,609	)	$	2,531	$	(2,704	)

Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income	$	(427	)	$	157,318		$	(20,166	)	$	(1,027	)	$	5,941	$	1,073


	Defined Benefit Pension Plans						Postretirement Benefit Plans
	2009			2008			2009			2008
	(In thousands)
Change in Benefit Obligation:
Benefit obligation, beginning of year	$	478,703		$	441,985		$	50,985		$	48,167
Service cost		11,153			11,989			82			100
Interest cost		26,606			26,299			2,263			2,797
Participant contributions		47			56			—			—
Plan amendments		394			—			—			—
Impact of currency exchange rate changes		7,561			(20,541	)		—			—
Actuarial loss (gain)		13,792			44,286			(3,364	)		3,044
Benefits paid		(24,949	)		(25,371	)		(3,494	)		(3,123	)

Benefit obligation, end of year	$	513,307		$	478,703		$	46,472		$	50,985

Change in Plan Assets:
Plan assets at fair value, beginning of year	$	233,939		$	330,363		$	—		$	—
Actual return on plan assets		52,701			(71,323	)		—			—
Employer contributions		30,388			15,279			3,494			3,123
Participant contributions		47			56			—			—
Impact of currency exchange rate changes		4,702			(15,065	)		—			—
Benefits paid		(24,949	)		(25,371	)		(3,494	)		(3,123	)

Plan assets at fair value, end of year	$	296,828		$	233,939		$	—		$	—

Net Amount Recognized in Consolidated Balance Sheets:
Funded status, end of year	$	(216,479	)	$	(244,764	)	$	(46,472	)	$	(50,985	)

Current accrued benefit liability		(4,517	)		(5,792	)		(3,200	)		(3,400	)
Noncurrent accrued benefit liability		(211,962	)		(238,972	)		(43,272	)		(47,585	)

Total accrued benefit liability	$	(216,479	)	$	(244,764	)	$	(46,472	)	$	(50,985	)

Amounts recognized in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss (a):
Net loss	$	210,522		$	237,227		$	9,645		$	13,254
Prior service cost		5,040			6,508			—			—

	$	215,562		$	243,735		$	9,645		$	13,254


	Defined Benefit Pension Plans		Postretirement Benefit Plans Before Subsidy		Benefit of Medicare Part D Subsidy
	(In thousands)
2010	$	23,482	$	3,500	$	(300	)
2011		24,205		3,600		(300	)
2012		25,269		3,600		(300	)
2013		26,204		3,600		(300	)
2014		27,135		3,500		(300	)
2015 - 2019		157,079		16,400		(1,300	)


Collective trust funds	$	220,467
US Government and US Government agency securities		36,625
Corporate debt instruments		23,588
Mutual funds		4,850
Other		11,298

Total	$	296,828


	Medium- Term Notes		2006 Senior Notes		2008 Senior Notes		Total
	(In thousands)
2010	$	50,000	$	—	$	—	$	50,000
2011		50,000		200,000		—		250,000
2012		50,000		—		—		50,000
2013		50,000		—		350,000		400,000

	$	200,000	$	200,000	$	350,000	$	750,000


	Asset Derivatives			Liability Derivatives
	Balance Sheet Location	Fair Value		Balance Sheet Location	Fair Value
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments:
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	Prepaid expenses and other current assets	$	7,008	Accrued liabilities	$	21,032
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	Other noncurrent assets		962	Other noncurrent liabilities		19

Total derivatives designated as hedging instruments		$	7,970		$	21,051

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	Prepaid expenses and other current assets	$	2,222		$	—

Total derivatives		$	10,192		$	21,051


	Amount of Loss Recognized in OCI			Amount of Loss Reclassified from Accumulated OCI to Statements of Operations			Statements of Operations Location
	(In thousands)
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments:
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	$	(29,253	)	$	(8,247	)	Cost of sales
Interest rate swaps		(349	)		(1,550	)	Interest expense

Total	$	(29,602	)	$	(9,797	)


	Amount of Gain Recognized in Statements of Operations		Statements of Operations Location
	(In thousands)
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments:
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts	$	16,633	Non-operating (income) expense
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts		4,160	Cost of sales

Total	$	20,793


	December 31, 2009		December 31, 2008
	(In thousands)
Assets:
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts (a)	$	10,192	$	24,714

Liabilities:
Foreign currency forward exchange contracts (a)	$	21,051	$	12,326
Interest rate swaps (b)		—		1,934

Total liabilities	$	21,051	$	14,260


	Capitalized Leases			Operating Leases
	(In thousands)
2010	$	300		$	94,000
2011		300			79,000
2012		300			64,000
2013		300			44,000
2014		300			36,000
Thereafter		1,500			205,000

	$	3,000	(a)	$	522,000


	Minimum Payments
	(In thousands)
2010	$	43,000
2011		84,000
2012		45,000
2013		31,000
2014		19,000
Thereafter		19,000

	$	241,000


	First Quarter			Second Quarter		Third Quarter		Fourth Quarter
	(In thousands, except per share amounts)
Year Ended December 31, 2009:
Net sales	$	785,646		$	898,197	$	1,791,875	$	1,955,128
Gross profit		345,872			406,060		918,615		1,044,150
Advertising and promotion expenses		84,064			89,820		197,106		238,763
Other selling and administrative expenses		317,017			283,727		385,055		387,977
Operating (loss) income		(55,209	)		32,513		336,454		417,410
(Loss) income before income taxes		(65,450	)		23,817		304,633		397,047
Net (loss) income (a)		(50,986	)		21,469		229,842		328,379
Net (loss) income per common share—basic	$	(0.14	)	$	0.06	$	0.63	$	0.90
Weighted average number of common shares		358,891			358,824		360,843		361,840
Net (loss) income per common share—diluted	$	(0.14	)	$	0.06	$	0.63	$	0.90
Weighted average number of common and potential common shares		358,891			360,881		361,925		364,565
Dividends declared per common share	$	—		$	—	$	—	$	0.75
Common stock market price:
High	$	16.65		$	16.52	$	19.11	$	20.67
Low		10.45			11.92		15.19		17.95
Year Ended December 31, 2008:
Net sales	$	919,299		$	1,112,431	$	1,946,315	$	1,939,957
Gross profit		396,836			495,334		900,070		892,166
Advertising and promotion expenses		102,961			116,805		223,826		275,567
Other selling and administrative expenses		330,410			347,921		360,895		384,229
Operating (loss) income		(36,535	)		30,608		315,349		232,370
(Loss) income before income taxes		(59,802	)		14,933		307,108		225,725
Net (loss) income (a)		(46,646	)		11,783		238,098		176,401
Net (loss) income per common share—basic	$	(0.13	)	$	0.03	$	0.65	$	0.49
Weighted average number of common shares		361,751			361,262		360,881		358,779
Net (loss) income per common share—diluted	$	(0.13	)	$	0.03	$	0.65	$	0.49
Weighted average number of common and potential common shares		361,751			363,919		361,742		359,490
Dividends declared per common share	$	—		$	—	$	—	$	0.75
Common stock market price:
High	$	21.89		$	21.80	$	21.79	$	18.14
Low		16.65			17.12		16.98		11.42


		Page
Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting		53
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm		54
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2009 and 2008		55
Consolidated Statements of Operations for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007		56
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007		57
Consolidated Statements of Stockholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007		58
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements		59


		Incorporated by Reference
Exhibit No.	Exhibit Description	Form	File No.	Exhibit(s)	Filing Date
3.0	Restated Certificate of Incorporation of Mattel	8-K	001-05647	99.0	May 21, 2007

3.1	Amended and Restated Bylaws of Mattel	8-K	001-05647	99.1	May 21, 2007

4.0	Specimen Stock Certificate with respect to Mattel’s Common Stock	10-Q	001-05647	4.0	August 3, 2007

4.1	Indenture, dated as of February 15, 1996, between Mattel and Chase Manhattan Bank and Trust Company, National Association, formerly Chemical Trust Company of California, as Trustee	10-K	001-05647	4.1	March 28, 2002

4.2	Indenture, dated as of February 15, 1996, between Mattel and Chemical Trust Company of California (now known as J. P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association) relating to Senior Debt Securities	S-3ASR	333-134740	4.1	June 5, 2006

4.3	Form of Indenture between Mattel and J. P. Morgan Trust Company, National Association, relating to Subordinated Debt Securities	S-3ASR	333-134740	4.2	June 5, 2006