Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2016
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	9. Commitments and Contingencies Leases The Company has entered into several non-cancellable operating leases for the rental of certain manufacturing and office space, equipment and automobiles expiring in various years through 2021. The principal building lease provides for a monthly rental of approximately $26,000. The Company also leases certain office equipment and automobiles under operating leases expiring through fiscal 2018. Class Action Securities Litigation On September 19, 2016, Richard Scalfani, an individual shareholder of Misonix, filed a lawsuit against the Company and its former CEO and CFO in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, alleging violations of the federal securities laws. The complaint alleges that the Company’s stock price was artificially inflated between November 5, 2015 and September 14, 2016 as a result of alleged false and misleading statements in the Company’s securities filings concerning the Company’s business, operations, and prospects and the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Scalfani filed the action seeking to represent a putative class of all persons (other than defendants, officers and directors of the Company, and their affiliates) who purchased publicly traded Misonix securities between November 5, 2015 and September 14, 2016. Scalfani seeks an unspecified amount of damages for himself and for the putative class under the federal securities laws. On November 18, 2016, Scalfani and another individual Misonix shareholder, Tracey Angiuoli, petitioned the Court to be appointed lead plaintiffs for purposes of pursuing the action on behalf of the putative class. The Company believes it has various legal and factual defenses to the allegations in the complaint, and intends to vigorously defend the action. The case is at its earliest stages; there has been no discovery and there is no trial date. The Company is not able to estimate the amount of potential loss it may recognize, if any, from this claim. The Company believes that its insurance coverage is sufficient to cover a potential loss, after payment of the policy retention of $250,000. Chinese Distributor For several months, with the assistance of outside counsel, the Company has been conducting a voluntary investigation into the business practices of the independent Chinese entity that previously distributed its products in China and the Company’s knowledge of those business practices, which may have implications under the FCPA, as well as into various internal controls issues identified during the investigation. On September 27, 2016 and September 28, 2016, we voluntarily contacted the SEC and the DOJ, respectively, to advise both agencies of these potential issues. The Company has provided and will continue to provide documents and other information to the SEC and the DOJ, and is cooperating fully with these agencies in their investigations of these matters. Although the Company’s investigation is complete, additional issues or facts could arise which may expand the scope or severity of the potential violations. The Company has no current information derived from the investigation or otherwise to suggest that its previously reported financial statements and results are incorrect. At this stage, the Company is unable to predict what, if any, action the DOJ or the SEC may take or what, if any, penalties or remedial measures these agencies may seek. Nor can the Company predict the impact on the Company as a result of these matters, which may include the imposition of fines, civil and criminal penalties, which are not currently estimable, as well as equitable remedies, including disgorgement of any profits earned from improper conduct and injunctive relief, limitations on the Company’s conduct, and the imposition of a compliance monitor. The DOJ and the SEC periodically have based the amount of a penalty or disgorgement in connection with an FCPA action, at least in part, on the amount of profits that a company obtained from the business in which the violations of the FCPA occurred. Since the inception of its distributorship relationship with the prior Chinese distributor in 2012, the Company has generated sales of approximately $8 million from the relationship. Further, the Company may suffer other civil penalties or adverse impacts, including lawsuits by private litigants in addition to the lawsuit that has already been filed, or investigations and fines imposed by local authorities. The investigative costs to date are approximately $1.9 million, of which approximately $1.4 million was charged to general and administrative expenses during the six months ended December 31, 2016.

Commitments and Contingencies

6 Months Ended

Dec. 31, 2016

Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]

9. Commitments and Contingencies

Leases

The Company has entered into several non-cancellable operating leases for the rental of certain manufacturing and office space, equipment and automobiles expiring in various years through 2021. The principal building lease provides for a monthly rental of approximately $26,000. The Company also leases certain office equipment and automobiles under operating leases expiring through fiscal 2018.

Class Action Securities Litigation

On September 19, 2016, Richard Scalfani, an individual shareholder of Misonix, filed a lawsuit against the Company and its former CEO and CFO in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, alleging violations of the federal securities laws. The complaint alleges that the Company’s stock price was artificially inflated between November 5, 2015 and September 14, 2016 as a result of alleged false and misleading statements in the Company’s securities filings concerning the Company’s business, operations, and prospects and the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Scalfani filed the action seeking to represent a putative class of all persons (other than defendants, officers and directors of the Company, and their affiliates) who purchased publicly traded Misonix securities between November 5, 2015 and September 14, 2016. Scalfani seeks an unspecified amount of damages for himself and for the putative class under the federal securities laws.

On November 18, 2016, Scalfani and another individual Misonix shareholder, Tracey Angiuoli, petitioned the Court to be appointed lead plaintiffs for purposes of pursuing the action on behalf of the putative class.

The Company believes it has various legal and factual defenses to the allegations in the complaint, and intends to vigorously defend the action. The case is at its earliest stages; there has been no discovery and there is no trial date. The Company is not able to estimate the amount of potential loss it may recognize, if any, from this claim. The Company believes that its insurance coverage is sufficient to cover a potential loss, after payment of the policy retention of $250,000.

Chinese Distributor

For several months, with the assistance of outside counsel, the Company has been conducting a voluntary investigation into the business practices of the independent Chinese entity that previously distributed its products in China and the Company’s knowledge of those business practices, which may have implications under the FCPA, as well as into various internal controls issues identified during the investigation.

On September 27, 2016 and September 28, 2016, we voluntarily contacted the SEC and the DOJ, respectively, to advise both agencies of these potential issues. The Company has provided and will continue to provide documents and other information to the SEC and the DOJ, and is cooperating fully with these agencies in their investigations of these matters.

Although the Company’s investigation is complete, additional issues or facts could arise which may expand the scope or severity of the potential violations. The Company has no current information derived from the investigation or otherwise to suggest that its previously reported financial statements and results are incorrect.

At this stage, the Company is unable to predict what, if any, action the DOJ or the SEC may take or what, if any, penalties or remedial measures these agencies may seek. Nor can the Company predict the impact on the Company as a result of these matters, which may include the imposition of fines, civil and criminal penalties, which are not currently estimable, as well as equitable remedies, including disgorgement of any profits earned from improper conduct and injunctive relief, limitations on the Company’s conduct, and the imposition of a compliance monitor. The DOJ and the SEC periodically have based the amount of a penalty or disgorgement in connection with an FCPA action, at least in part, on the amount of profits that a company obtained from the business in which the violations of the FCPA occurred. Since the inception of its distributorship relationship with the prior Chinese distributor in 2012, the Company has generated sales of approximately $8 million from the relationship.

Further, the Company may suffer other civil penalties or adverse impacts, including lawsuits by private litigants in addition to the lawsuit that has already been filed, or investigations and fines imposed by local authorities. The investigative costs to date are approximately $1.9 million, of which approximately $1.4 million was charged to general and administrative expenses during the six months ended December 31, 2016.