Commitments, contingencies and other

The Company is involved in litigation from time to time in the regular course of its business. Except as noted below, there are no material legal proceedings pending or known by the Company to be contemplated to which the Company is a party or to which any of its property is subject.

Beginning in August 2010, a series of civil lawsuits were initiated in several U.S. federal courts alleging that certain manufacturers of polyurethane foam products and competitors of the Company’s carpet underlay division had engaged in price fixing in violation of U.S. antitrust laws. Mohawk has been named as a defendant in a number of the individual cases (the first filed on August 26, 2010), as well as in two consolidated amended class action complaints, the first filed on February 28, 2011, on behalf of a class of all direct purchasers of polyurethane foam products, and the second filed on March 21, 2011, on behalf of a class of indirect purchasers. All pending cases in which the Company has been named as a defendant have been filed in or transferred to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio for consolidated pre-trial proceedings under the name In re: Polyurethane Foam Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 1:10-MDL-02196.

In these actions, the plaintiffs, on behalf of themselves and/or a class of purchasers, seek three times the amount of unspecified damages allegedly suffered as a result of alleged overcharges in the price of polyurethane foam products from at least 1999 to the present. Each plaintiff also seeks attorney fees, pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, court costs, and injunctive relief against future violations. In April 2011, the Company filed a motion to dismiss the class action claims brought by the direct purchasers, and in May 2011, the Company moved to dismiss the claims brought by the indirect purchasers. On July 19, 2011, the Court issued a written opinion denying all defendants’ motions to dismiss. In December 2011, the Company was named as a defendant in a Canadian Class action, Hi ! Neighbor Floor Covering Co. Limited v. Hickory Springs Manufacturing Company, et al., filed in the Superior Court of Justice of Ontario, Canada and Options Consommateures v. Vitafoam, Inc. et.al., filed in the Superior Court of Justice of Quebec, Montreal, Canada, both of which allege similar claims against the Company as raised in the U.S. actions and seek unspecified damages and punitive damages. The Company denies all of the allegations in these actions and will vigorously defend itself.

The Company believes that adequate provisions for resolution of all contingencies, claims and pending litigation have been made for probable losses that are reasonably estimable. These contingencies are subject to significant uncertainties and we are unable to estimate the amount or range of loss, if any, in excess of amounts accrued. The Company does not believe that the ultimate outcome of these actions will have a material adverse effect on its financial condition but could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, cash flows or liquidity in a given quarter or year.

In January 2012, the Company received a €23,789 assessment from the Belgian tax authority related to its year ended December 31, 2008, asserting that the Company had understated its Belgian taxable income for that year. The Company filed a formal protest in the first quarter of 2012 refuting the Belgian tax authority's position and in order to eliminate the accrual of additional interest on the assessed amount, the Company remitted payment of the tax assessment, plus applicable interest of €2,912 (collectively, the “Deposit”). In July 2012, the Company received notification of the Belgian tax authority's intention to extend the statute of limitations back to and including the tax year 2005. On September 10, 2012, the Company received notice from the Belgian tax authority setting aside the 2008 assessment and refunding the Deposit to the Company. On October 23, 2012, the Company received notification from the Belgian tax authority of its intent to increase the Company's tax base for the 2008 tax year under a revised theory. On December 28, 2012, the Company received the refund of the Deposit of €23,789. On January 30, 2013, the Company received a refund of the interest Deposit of €2,912 and interest income of €1,583 earned on the Deposit.

On December 28, 2012, the Belgian taxing authority issued assessments under a revised theory related to the years ended December 31, 2005 and December 31, 2009, in the amounts of €46,135 and €35,567, respectively, excluding potential interest and penalties. The Company timely filed formal protests in the first quarter of 2013 for the years assessed. The Company disagrees with the views of the Belgian tax authority on this matter and will continue to vigorously defend itself. Although there can be no assurances, the Company believes the ultimate outcome of these actions will not have a material adverse effect on its financial condition but could have a material adverse effect on its results of operations, liquidity or cash flows in a given quarter or year.

For the three months ended March 30, 2013, the Company recorded pre-tax business restructuring charges of $8,222, of which $3,006 was recorded as cost of sales and $5,216 was recorded as selling, general and administrative expenses for the same periods, respectively. For the three months ended March 31, 2012, the Company had no business restructuring charges. The charges for 2013 primarily relate to the Company’s actions taken to lower its cost structure and improve the efficiency of its manufacturing operations and administrative functions, as well as actions related to the Company's acquisition of Pergo.

The restructuring activity for the three months ended March 30, 2013 is as follows:



	Lease impairments			Asset write-downs		Severance		Other restructuring costs		Total
Balance as of December 31, 2012	$	7,457		—		2,898		—		10,355
Provision - Mohawk Segment	—			—		5,892		326		6,218
Provision - Dal-Tile Segment	—			37		—		426		463
Provision - Unilin Segment	—					1,456		85		1,541
Cash payments	(703		)	—		(4,145	)	(837	)	(5,685	)
Non-cash items				(37	)	—				(37	)
Balance as of March 30, 2013	$	6,754		—		6,101		—		12,855

The Company expects the remaining severance costs, lease impairments and other restructuring costs to be paid over the next four years.

Subsequent to March 30, 2013, the Company completed negotiations with the unions in Sweden and finalized plans to close Pergo's Trelleborg and Perstorp plants. Both plants will close by July 31, 2013 and production will be transferred to the Wielsbeke plant in Belgium. The Company is finalizing its estimates and expects to record a restructuring charge in the second quarter of 2013.

Subsequent to March 30, 2013, the Company announced its intention to consolidate two roofing plants in the Unilin segment. The Company is finalizing its estimates and expects to record a restructuring charge in the second quarter of 2013.