Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2014
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	Commitments and Contingencies Contingencies-Between July 14, 2011 and July 21, 2011, securities class action complaints were filed against the Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The complaints assert claims against (i) the Company and the Company's CEO and CFO for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and (ii) the Company's CEO and CFO as alleged controlling persons. The complaints generally allege false statements in earnings reports, SEC filings, press releases, and other public statements that allegedly caused the Company's stock to trade at artificially inflated prices. Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages. The New York action has been transferred to Georgia and has been consolidated with the Georgia action, now styled In re: Ebix, Inc. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 1:11-CV-02400-RWS (N.D. Ga.). The parties have reached a mutually acceptable agreement to resolve this action for a cash payment of $6.5 million to be funded by both the Company and its insurance carrier. As previously disclosed, the Company recorded a contingent liability and recognized a charge against earnings in the amount of $4.23 million ($2.63 million net of the associated tax benefit) as part of this settlement. Following a final fairness hearing on June 5, 2014, the Court entered the Final Order and Judgment Approving the Class Action Settlement and Plan of Allocation and Certifying the Settlement Class on June 11, 2014, and the Final Order and Judgment Awarding Attorneys’ Fees, an Incentive Award, and Reimbursement of Expenses on June 13, 2014. The time for appeal has passed and no appeals were filed. This matter is now concluded. In connection with this shareholder class action suit, there have been three derivative complaints brought by certain shareholders on behalf of the Company, which name certain of the Company's officers and its entire board of directors as Defendants. The first such derivative action was brought by an alleged shareholder named Paul Nauman styled Nauman v. Raina, et al., Civil Action File No. 2011-cv-205276 (Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia), filed September 1, 2011. The second such derivative action was brought by an alleged shareholder named Gilbert Spagnola styled Spagnola v. Bhalla, et al., Civil Action No. 1:13-CV-00062-RWS (N.D. Ga.), filed January 7, 2013. The third such derivative action was brought by an alleged shareholder named Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund styled Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund v. Raina, et al., Civil Action No. 1:13-CV-00246-RWS (N.D. Ga.), filed January 23, 2013. These derivative actions are based on substantially the same factual allegations in the shareholder class action suit, but also variously claim breach of fiduciary duties, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, the wasting of corporate assets, negligence, unjust enrichment by the Company's directors, and violation of Section 14 of the Exchange Act. The Nauman case was stayed pending the completion of expert discovery in the shareholder class action suit. On April 12, 2013, the Court entered an Order consolidating the Spagnola and Hotel derivative cases under the style In re Ebix, Inc. Derivative Litigation, File No. 1:13-CV-00062- RWS (N.D. Ga.), appointing Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund as Lead Derivative Plaintiff, and appointing the law firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC as Lead Derivative Counsel and The Law Offices of David A. Bain LLC as Liaison Counsel. Lead Derivative Plaintiff filed its Consolidated Shareholder Derivative and Class Action Complaint on May 20, 2013. Thereafter, the Court entered a Consent Order on June 4, 2013, setting a schedule for Lead Derivative Plaintiff to amend its Complaint in light of the anticipated preliminary proxy related to a proposed transaction announced on May 1, 2013 with affiliates of Goldman Sachs & Co. The parties in both the derivative actions are conferring regarding future case scheduling. The Company denies any liability and intends to defend the derivative actions vigorously. On December 3, 2012, the Company received a subpoena and letter from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) dated November 30, 2012, stating that the SEC is conducting a formal, non-public investigation styled In the Matter of Ebix, Inc. (A-3318) and seeking documents primarily related to the issues raised in the In re: Ebix, Inc. Securities Litigation. On April 16, 2013, the Company received a second subpoena from the SEC seeking additional documents. The Company has cooperated with the SEC to provide the requested documents. On June 6, 2013, the Company was notified that the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia had opened an investigation into allegations of intentional misconduct that had been brought to its attention from the pending shareholder class action lawsuit against the Company's directors and officers, the media and other sources. The Company is cooperating with the U.S. Attorney's office. Following our announcement on May 1, 2013 of the Company's execution of a merger agreement with affiliates of Goldman Sachs & Co., twelve putative class action complaints challenging the proposed merger were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery. These complaints name as Defendants some combination of the Company, its directors, Goldman Sachs & Co. and affiliated entities. On June 10, 2013, the twelve complaints were consolidated by the Delaware Court of Chancery, now captioned In re Ebix, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, CA No. 8526-VCN. On June 19, 2013, the Company announced that the merger agreement had been terminated pursuant to a Termination and Settlement Agreement. After Defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated proceeding, Lead Plaintiffs amended their operative complaint to drop their claims against Goldman Sachs & Co. and focus their allegations on an Acquisition Bonus Agreement (“ABA”) between the Company and Robin Raina. On September 26, 2013, Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended Consolidated Complaint. On July 24, 2014, the Court issued its Memorandum Opinion. The only surviving counts are as follows: (i) Counts II and IV, but only to the extent the Plaintiffs seek non-monetary relief for alleged material misstatements related to the ABA base price in the 2010 Proxy Statement; (ii) Count II, but only to the extent it challenges the continued existence of the ABA as an alleged unreasonable anti-takeover device; and, (iii) Count V, but only to the extent that it relates to the compensation the Board received under the Company’s 2010 Stock Incentive Plan.The Company denies any liability and intends to defend the action vigorously. The Company has been sued by Microsoft for alleged copyright infringement, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft Licensing GP v. Ebix, Inc., Case No. 1:13-CV-01655-CAP (N.D.Ga), filed May 15, 2013. The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 10, 2013. In response, Microsoft filed an Amended Complaint. The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint on August 29, 2013. On February 14, 2014, the Court denied the Company’s Motion to Dismiss. The Company cooperated with Microsoft in an audit of all of the Company's Microsoft licenses. The current deadline to respond to the Amended Complaint is September 8, 2014. The Company denies any liability and intends to defend the action vigorously. The Company is involved in various other claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate likely disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity. Lease Commitments—The Company leases office space under non-cancelable operating leases with expiration dates ranging through 2019, with various renewal options. Capital leases range from three to five years and are primarily for computer equipment. There were multiple assets under various individual capital leases at June 30, 2014 and 2013. Rental expense for office facilities and certain equipment subject to operating leases for the six months ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 was $3.3 million and $3.3 million, respectively. Self Insurance—For most of the Company’s U.S. employees the Company is self-insured for its health insurance program and has a stop loss policy that limits the individual liability to $120 thousand per person and the aggregate liability to 125% of the expected claims based upon the number of participants and historical claims. As of June 30, 2014, the amount accrued on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet for the self-insured component of the Company’s employee health insurance was $302 thousand. The maximum potential estimated cumulative liability for the annual contract period, which ends in September 2014, is $2.9 million.

Commitments and Contingencies

Contingencies-Between July 14, 2011 and July 21, 2011, securities class action complaints were filed against the Company and certain of its officers in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York and in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia. The complaints assert claims against (i) the Company and the Company's CEO and CFO for alleged violations of Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and (ii) the Company's CEO and CFO as alleged controlling persons. The complaints generally allege false statements in earnings reports, SEC filings, press releases, and other public statements that allegedly caused the Company's stock to trade at artificially inflated prices. Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of damages. The New York action has been transferred to Georgia and has been consolidated with the Georgia action, now styled In re: Ebix, Inc. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 1:11-CV-02400-RWS (N.D. Ga.). The parties have reached a mutually acceptable agreement to resolve this action for a cash payment of $6.5 million to be funded by both the Company and its insurance carrier. As previously disclosed, the Company recorded a contingent liability and recognized a charge against earnings in the amount of $4.23 million ($2.63 million net of the associated tax benefit) as part of this settlement. Following a final fairness hearing on June 5, 2014, the Court entered the Final Order and Judgment Approving the Class Action Settlement and Plan of Allocation and Certifying the Settlement Class on June 11, 2014, and the Final Order and Judgment Awarding Attorneys’ Fees, an Incentive Award, and Reimbursement of Expenses on June 13, 2014. The time for appeal has passed and no appeals were filed. This matter is now concluded.

In connection with this shareholder class action suit, there have been three derivative complaints brought by certain shareholders on behalf of the Company, which name certain of the Company's officers and its entire board of directors as Defendants. The first such derivative action was brought by an alleged shareholder named Paul Nauman styled Nauman v. Raina, et al., Civil Action File No. 2011-cv-205276 (Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia), filed September 1, 2011. The second such derivative action was brought by an alleged shareholder named Gilbert Spagnola styled Spagnola v. Bhalla, et al., Civil Action No. 1:13-CV-00062-RWS (N.D. Ga.), filed January 7, 2013. The third such derivative action was brought by an alleged shareholder named Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund styled Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund v. Raina, et al., Civil Action No. 1:13-CV-00246-RWS (N.D. Ga.), filed January 23, 2013. These derivative actions are based on substantially the same factual allegations in the shareholder class action suit, but also variously claim breach of fiduciary duties, abuse of control, gross mismanagement, the wasting of corporate assets, negligence, unjust enrichment by the Company's directors, and violation of Section 14 of the Exchange Act. The Nauman case was stayed pending the completion of expert discovery in the shareholder class action suit. On April 12, 2013, the Court entered an Order consolidating the Spagnola and Hotel derivative cases under the style In re Ebix, Inc. Derivative Litigation, File No. 1:13-CV-00062- RWS (N.D. Ga.), appointing Hotel Trades Council and Hotel Association of New York City, Inc. Pension Fund as Lead Derivative Plaintiff, and appointing the law firm Cohen Milstein Sellers & Toll PLLC as Lead Derivative Counsel and The Law Offices of David A. Bain LLC as Liaison Counsel. Lead Derivative Plaintiff filed its Consolidated Shareholder Derivative and Class Action Complaint on May 20, 2013. Thereafter, the Court entered a Consent Order on June 4, 2013, setting a schedule for Lead Derivative Plaintiff to amend its Complaint in light of the anticipated preliminary proxy related to a proposed transaction announced on May 1, 2013 with affiliates of Goldman Sachs & Co. The parties in both the derivative actions are conferring regarding future case scheduling. The Company denies any liability and intends to defend the derivative actions vigorously.

On December 3, 2012, the Company received a subpoena and letter from the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) dated November 30, 2012, stating that the SEC is conducting a formal, non-public investigation styled In the Matter of Ebix, Inc. (A-3318) and seeking documents primarily related to the issues raised in the In re: Ebix, Inc. Securities Litigation. On April 16, 2013, the Company received a second subpoena from the SEC seeking additional documents. The Company has cooperated with the SEC to provide the requested documents.

On June 6, 2013, the Company was notified that the U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Georgia had opened an investigation into allegations of intentional misconduct that had been brought to its attention from the pending shareholder class action lawsuit against the Company's directors and officers, the media and other sources. The Company is cooperating with the U.S. Attorney's office.

Following our announcement on May 1, 2013 of the Company's execution of a merger agreement with affiliates of Goldman Sachs & Co., twelve putative class action complaints challenging the proposed merger were filed in the Delaware Court of Chancery. These complaints name as Defendants some combination of the Company, its directors, Goldman Sachs & Co. and affiliated entities. On June 10, 2013, the twelve complaints were consolidated by the Delaware Court of Chancery, now captioned In re Ebix, Inc. Stockholder Litigation, CA No. 8526-VCN. On June 19, 2013, the Company announced that the merger agreement had been terminated pursuant to a Termination and Settlement Agreement. After Defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated proceeding, Lead Plaintiffs amended their operative complaint to drop their claims against Goldman Sachs & Co. and focus their allegations on an Acquisition Bonus Agreement (“ABA”) between the Company and Robin Raina. On September 26, 2013, Defendants moved to dismiss the Amended Consolidated Complaint. On July 24, 2014, the Court issued its Memorandum Opinion. The only surviving counts are as follows: (i) Counts II and IV, but only to the extent the Plaintiffs seek non-monetary relief for alleged material misstatements related to the ABA base price in the 2010 Proxy Statement; (ii) Count II, but only to the extent it challenges the continued existence of the ABA as an alleged unreasonable anti-takeover device; and, (iii) Count V, but only to the extent that it relates to the compensation the Board received under the Company’s 2010 Stock Incentive Plan.The Company denies any liability and intends to defend the action vigorously.

The Company has been sued by Microsoft for alleged copyright infringement, breach of contract, and unjust enrichment. Microsoft Corporation and Microsoft Licensing GP v. Ebix, Inc., Case No. 1:13-CV-01655-CAP (N.D.Ga), filed May 15, 2013. The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss on July 10, 2013. In response, Microsoft filed an Amended Complaint. The Company filed a Motion to Dismiss the Amended Complaint on August 29, 2013. On February 14, 2014, the Court denied the Company’s Motion to Dismiss. The Company cooperated with Microsoft in an audit of all of the Company's Microsoft licenses. The current deadline to respond to the Amended Complaint is September 8, 2014. The Company denies any liability and intends to defend the action vigorously.

The Company is involved in various other claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate likely disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s consolidated financial position, results of operations or liquidity.

Lease Commitments—The Company leases office space under non-cancelable operating leases with expiration dates ranging through 2019, with various renewal options. Capital leases range from three to five years and are primarily for computer equipment. There were multiple assets under various individual capital leases at June 30, 2014 and 2013. Rental expense for office facilities and certain equipment subject to operating leases for the six months ended June 30, 2014 and 2013 was $3.3 million and $3.3 million, respectively.

Self Insurance—For most of the Company’s U.S. employees the Company is self-insured for its health insurance program and has a stop loss policy that limits the individual liability to $120 thousand per person and the aggregate liability to 125% of the expected claims based upon the number of participants and historical claims. As of June 30, 2014, the amount accrued on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet for the self-insured component of the Company’s employee health insurance was $302 thousand. The maximum potential estimated cumulative liability for the annual contract period, which ends in September 2014, is $2.9 million.