Commitments and Contingencies	6 Months Ended
Jul. 04, 2015
Commitments and Contingencies
Commitments and Contingencies	Note 7 – Commitments and Contingencies Contingencies On April 29, 2015, Seaboard received from the Department of Justice, Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section (“AFMLS”), a Grand Jury subpoena issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the “DC District Court”) requesting records related to 37 specified foreign companies and five individuals. Seaboard has previously produced documents responsive to Grand Jury subpoenas dated September 18, 2014 and October 17, 2014. The subpoena issued September 18, 2014 requested records related to nine entities and one individual, and the subpoena issued October 17, 2014 requested records with respect to eight additional entities and one additional individual. Two additional subpoenas, each dated July 2, 2015 were received by Seaboard requesting records related to a certain customer. The companies and individuals as to which the requested records relate to are not affiliated with Seaboard. The AFMLS attorney conducting the investigation has advised Seaboard that it is not a target of the investigation. Seaboard has retained outside counsel and is cooperating with the government’s investigation. It is impossible at this stage either to determine the probability of a favorable or unfavorable outcome or to estimate the amount of potential loss, if any, resulting from the government’s inquiry. On September 19, 2012, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) executed three search warrants authorizing the seizure of certain records from Seaboard’s offices in Merriam, Kansas and at the Seaboard Foods LLC (“Seaboard Foods”) employment office and the human resources department in Guymon, Oklahoma. The warrants generally called for the seizure of employment-related files, certain e-mails and other electronic records relating to Medicaid and Medicaid recipients, certain health care providers in the Guymon area, and Seaboard’s health plan and certain personnel issues. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Oklahoma (“USAO”), which has been leading the investigation, previously advised Seaboard that it intended to close its investigation and that no charges would be brought against Seaboard. However, discussions with the USAO continue regarding the status of the investigation and the possibility of proceedings by the USAO, ICE and/or the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office remains. No proceedings have been filed or brought as of the date of this report. It is not possible at this time to determine whether any agencies will continue to pursue an investigation or whether Seaboard will incur any material fines, penalties or liabilities in connection with this matter. Seaboard’s subsidiary Seaboard Foods, has a dispute with the United Food & Commercial Workers International Union-industry Pension Fund (“Pension Fund”) regarding pension contributions being made by Seaboard Foods to a multi-employer pension plan for the benefit of union employees at Seaboard Foods’ Guymon pork processing plant (the “Pension Plan”). Under a Collective Bargaining Agreement (“CBA”) with United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local Two (“UCFW”), Seaboard Foods is making contributions to the Pension Plan based on hours worked to fund a pension benefit. Effective July 21, 2014, Seaboard Foods and UFCW negotiated a renewal of the CBA, which reduced a portion of the pension contributions being made to the Pension Plan and implemented a new 401(k) Plan pursuant to which Seaboard Foods also makes contributions on behalf of the employees. The changes to the pension contributions and the 401(k) Plan became effective January 1, 2015, pursuant to renewal of the CBA. The contributions being made by Seaboard Foods to the 401(k) Plan exceed the reduction in contributions being made to the Pension Plan. The dispute involves the Pension Fund’s acceptance of the changes to the contributions to the Pension Plan. Seaboard Foods had previously contacted the Pension Fund advising it of Seaboard Foods’ intent to bargain with the UCFW to make changes to the contributions and also advising the Pension Fund of the negotiated changes before they went into effect. Seaboard Foods believes it received approval of the changes from the Pension Fund. In fact, prior to the changes becoming effective, the Pension Fund sent letters to the employees and to Seaboard Foods giving notice of a reduction in benefit accruals attributable to the changes made to the contributions as negotiated in the CBA. However, on June 17, 2015, Seaboard Foods received a letter from the Pension Fund demanding that Seaboard Foods reinstate, effective January 1, 2015, the contributions being made under the prior CBA or the Pension Fund will consider Seaboard Foods as having fully withdrawn from the Pension Fund effective December 31, 2014. This position by the Pension Fund directly contradicts the Pension Fund’s previous representations and Seaboard Foods believes the Pension Fund cannot legally take this action. If the Pension Fund is successful in effecting the full withdrawal by Seaboard Foods from the Pension Plan, Seaboard Foods would incur a withdrawal liability. The exact amount of this withdrawal liability is dependent of a number of factors and is approximately $11,000,000, paid in quarterly installments over a period not to exceed 20 years. If Seaboard Foods were to reinstate the pension contributions to the levels existing under the prior CBA, and as now demanded by the Pension Fund trustees, it would have to re-open negotiations of the CBA. No amounts have been accrued for the potential withdrawal liability as of July 4, 2015 as Seaboard does not believe such liability is probable as of the date of this filing. Seaboard is subject to various administrative and judicial proceedings and other legal matters related to the normal conduct of its business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate resolutions of these items are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements of Seaboard. Contingent Obligations Certain of the non-consolidated affiliates and third party contractors who perform services for Seaboard have bank debt supporting their underlying operations. From time to time, Seaboard will provide guarantees of that debt in order to further Seaboard’s business objectives. Seaboard does not issue guarantees of third parties for compensation. As of July 4, 2015, guarantees outstanding to third parties were not material. Seaboard has not accrued a liability for any of the third party or affiliate guarantees as management considers the likelihood of loss to be remote. As of July 4, 2015, Seaboard’s borrowing capacity under its uncommitted lines was reduced by letters of credit totaling $1,531,000. There were no letters of credit to reduce the committed lines. The notes payable to banks under the committed and uncommitted credit lines are unsecured. These lines of credit do not require compensating balances. On May 13, 2015 Seaboard, through a wholly-owned subsidiary, agreed to contribute up to $207,400,000 to jointly develop and operate a pork processing facility in Sioux City, Iowa. Approximately $25,700,000 will be contributed in 2015 with the remaining amounts through 2019. As part of the operations, Seaboard agreed to provide hogs to be processed at the facility. Seaboard is currently evaluating its options to provide additional hogs to the facility.

Note 7 – Commitments and Contingencies

Contingencies

On April 29, 2015, Seaboard received from the Department of Justice, Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section (“AFMLS”), a Grand Jury subpoena issued by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the “DC District Court”) requesting records related to 37 specified foreign companies and five individuals. Seaboard has previously produced documents responsive to Grand Jury subpoenas dated September 18, 2014 and October 17, 2014. The subpoena issued September 18, 2014 requested records related to nine entities and one individual, and the subpoena issued October 17, 2014 requested records with respect to eight additional entities and one additional individual. Two additional subpoenas, each dated July 2, 2015 were received by Seaboard requesting records related to a certain customer. The companies and individuals as to which the requested records relate to are not affiliated with Seaboard. The AFMLS attorney conducting the investigation has advised Seaboard that it is not a target of the investigation. Seaboard has retained outside counsel and is cooperating with the government’s investigation. It is impossible at this stage either to determine the probability of a favorable or unfavorable outcome or to estimate the amount of potential loss, if any, resulting from the government’s inquiry.

On September 19, 2012, the United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (“ICE”) executed three search warrants authorizing the seizure of certain records from Seaboard’s offices in Merriam, Kansas and at the Seaboard Foods LLC (“Seaboard Foods”) employment office and the human resources department in Guymon, Oklahoma. The warrants generally called for the seizure of employment-related files, certain e-mails and other electronic records relating to Medicaid and Medicaid recipients, certain health care providers in the Guymon area, and Seaboard’s health plan and certain personnel issues. The United States Attorney’s Office for the Western District of Oklahoma (“USAO”), which has been leading the investigation, previously advised Seaboard that it intended to close its investigation and that no charges would be brought against Seaboard. However, discussions with the USAO continue regarding the status of the investigation and the possibility of proceedings by the USAO, ICE and/or the Oklahoma Attorney General’s office remains. No proceedings have been filed or brought as of the date of this report. It is not possible at this time to determine whether any agencies will continue to pursue an investigation or whether Seaboard will incur any material fines, penalties or liabilities in connection with this matter.

Seaboard’s subsidiary Seaboard Foods, has a dispute with the United Food & Commercial Workers International Union-industry Pension Fund (“Pension Fund”) regarding pension contributions being made by Seaboard Foods to a multi-employer pension plan for the benefit of union employees at Seaboard Foods’ Guymon pork processing plant (the “Pension Plan”). Under a Collective Bargaining Agreement (“CBA”) with United Food & Commercial Workers Union Local Two (“UCFW”), Seaboard Foods is making contributions to the Pension Plan based on hours worked to fund a pension benefit. Effective July 21, 2014, Seaboard Foods and UFCW negotiated a renewal of the CBA, which reduced a portion of the pension contributions being made to the Pension Plan and implemented a new 401(k) Plan pursuant to which Seaboard Foods also makes contributions on behalf of the employees. The changes to the pension contributions and the 401(k) Plan became effective January 1, 2015, pursuant to renewal of the CBA. The contributions being made by Seaboard Foods to the 401(k) Plan exceed the reduction in contributions being made to the Pension Plan.

The dispute involves the Pension Fund’s acceptance of the changes to the contributions to the Pension Plan. Seaboard Foods had previously contacted the Pension Fund advising it of Seaboard Foods’ intent to bargain with the UCFW to make changes to the contributions and also advising the Pension Fund of the negotiated changes before they went into effect. Seaboard Foods believes it received approval of the changes from the Pension Fund. In fact, prior to the changes becoming effective, the Pension Fund sent letters to the employees and to Seaboard Foods giving notice of a reduction in benefit accruals attributable to the changes made to the contributions as negotiated in the CBA. However, on June 17, 2015, Seaboard Foods received a letter from the Pension Fund demanding that Seaboard Foods reinstate, effective January 1, 2015, the contributions being made under the prior CBA or the Pension Fund will consider Seaboard Foods as having fully withdrawn from the Pension Fund effective December 31, 2014. This position by the Pension Fund directly contradicts the Pension Fund’s previous representations and Seaboard Foods believes the Pension Fund cannot legally take this action. If the Pension Fund is successful in effecting the full withdrawal by Seaboard Foods from the Pension Plan, Seaboard Foods would incur a withdrawal liability. The exact amount of this withdrawal liability is dependent of a number of factors and is approximately $11,000,000, paid in quarterly installments over a period not to exceed 20 years. If Seaboard Foods were to reinstate the pension contributions to the levels existing under the prior CBA, and as now demanded by the Pension Fund trustees, it would have to re-open negotiations of the CBA. No amounts have been accrued for the potential withdrawal liability as of July 4, 2015 as Seaboard does not believe such liability is probable as of the date of this filing.

Seaboard is subject to various administrative and judicial proceedings and other legal matters related to the normal conduct of its business. In the opinion of management, the ultimate resolutions of these items are not expected to have a material adverse effect on the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements of Seaboard.

Contingent Obligations

Certain of the non-consolidated affiliates and third party contractors who perform services for Seaboard have bank debt supporting their underlying operations. From time to time, Seaboard will provide guarantees of that debt in order to further Seaboard’s business objectives. Seaboard does not issue guarantees of third parties for compensation. As of July 4, 2015, guarantees outstanding to third parties were not material. Seaboard has not accrued a liability for any of the third party or affiliate guarantees as management considers the likelihood of loss to be remote.

As of July 4, 2015, Seaboard’s borrowing capacity under its uncommitted lines was reduced by letters of credit totaling $1,531,000. There were no letters of credit to reduce the committed lines. The notes payable to banks under the committed and uncommitted credit lines are unsecured. These lines of credit do not require compensating balances.

On May 13, 2015 Seaboard, through a wholly-owned subsidiary, agreed to contribute up to $207,400,000 to jointly develop and operate a pork processing facility in Sioux City, Iowa. Approximately $25,700,000 will be contributed in 2015 with the remaining amounts through 2019. As part of the operations, Seaboard agreed to provide hogs to be processed at the facility. Seaboard is currently evaluating its options to provide additional hogs to the facility.