COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	9 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Unconditional Purchase Obligations The Company purchases materials and services from a variety of suppliers and manufacturers. During the normal course of business and to manage manufacturing operations and general and administrative activities, the Company may enter into firm, non-cancelable, and unconditional purchase obligations for which amounts are not recorded on the consolidated balance sheets. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing, component purchase, and other general and administrative commitments of $192.3 million. Other Guarantees and Obligations In the ordinary course of business, the Company may provide indemnifications of varying scope and terms to customers, vendors, lessors, business partners, purchasers of assets or subsidiaries and other parties with respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the Company's breach of agreements or representations and warranties made by the Company, services to be provided by the Company, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties or, with respect to the sale of assets of a subsidiary, matters related to the Company's conduct of business and tax matters prior to the sale. From time to time, the Company indemnifies customers against combinations of loss, expense, or liability arising from various triggering events relating to the sale and use of its products and services. In addition, the Company also provides indemnification to customers against claims related to undiscovered liabilities, additional product liability, or environmental obligations. The Company has also entered into indemnification agreements with its directors, officers and certain other personnel that will require the Company, among other things, to indemnify them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers of the Company or certain of its affiliated entities. The Company maintains director and officer liability insurance, which may cover certain liabilities arising from its obligation to indemnify its directors, officers and certain other personnel in certain circumstances. It is not possible to determine the aggregate maximum potential loss under these agreements due to the limited history of prior claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular claim. Such indemnification obligations might not be subject to maximum loss clauses. Historically, the Company has not incurred material costs as a result of obligations under these agreements and it has not accrued any liabilities related to such indemnification obligations in the condensed consolidated financial statements. Claims and Litigation On October 12, 2012, GN Netcom, Inc. ("GN") sued the Company in the United States ("U.S.") District Court for the District of Delaware (“Court”), alleging violations of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and Delaware common law. In its complaint, GN specifically alleged four causes of action: monopolization, attempted monopolization, concerted action in restraint of trade, and tortious interference with business relations. GN claimed that the Company dominates the market for headsets sold into contact centers in the U.S. and that a critical channel for sales of headsets to contact centers is through a limited network of specialized independent distributors (“SIDs”). GN asserted that the Company attracts SIDs through exclusive distributor agreements and alleged that the use of these agreements is illegal. GN sought injunctive relief, total damages in an unspecified amount, plus attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as unspecified legal and equitable relief. The case was tried to a jury in October, 2017, resulting in a verdict in favor of the Company. GN filed a motion for new trial in November, 2017, and that motion was denied by the Court in January, 2018. The Company filed a motion for attorneys’ fees in November, 2017 and that motion was denied by the Court in January, 2018. The Company filed a motion for certain recoverable costs, and the parties stipulated to an immaterial amount, which GN will pay the Company. If the jury verdict were to be overturned on appeal, the Company would have to repay that amount to GN. GN has not indicated whether it plans to file an appeal of the jury’s verdict. In a letter dated May 1, 2017, the Company received a Notice of Proposed Debarment from the General Services Administration ("GSA") informing the Company that the GSA has proposed that the Company be debarred from participation in Federal procurement and non-procurement programs based on the above spoliation order issued in the GN litigation matter. The Company submitted a response to the GSA demonstrating that it is a responsible contractor and that a suspension or debarment is neither necessary to protect the government nor warranted. The GSA found “no cause” for debarment of Plantronics and terminated the proceeding against the Company in August 2017. In addition to the specific matter discussed above, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings arising in the normal course of conducting business. For such legal proceedings, where applicable, the Company has accrued an amount that reflects the aggregate liability deemed probable and estimable, but this amount is not material to the Company's financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. With respect to proceedings for which no accrual has been made, the Company is not able to estimate an amount or range of any reasonably possible additional losses because of the preliminary nature of many of these proceedings, the difficulty in ascertaining the applicable facts relating to many of these proceedings, the variable treatment of claims made in many of these proceedings, and the difficulty of predicting the settlement value of many of these proceedings. However, based upon the Company's historical experience, the resolution of these proceedings is not expected to have a material effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The Company may incur substantial legal fees, which are expensed as incurred, in defending against these legal proceedings.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Unconditional Purchase Obligations

The Company purchases materials and services from a variety of suppliers and manufacturers. During the normal course of business and to manage manufacturing operations and general and administrative activities, the Company may enter into firm, non-cancelable, and unconditional purchase obligations for which amounts are not recorded on the consolidated balance sheets. As of December 31, 2017, the Company had outstanding off-balance sheet third-party manufacturing, component purchase, and other general and administrative commitments of $192.3 million.

Other Guarantees and Obligations

In the ordinary course of business, the Company may provide indemnifications of varying scope and terms to customers, vendors, lessors, business partners, purchasers of assets or subsidiaries and other parties with respect to certain matters, including, but not limited to, losses arising out of the Company's breach of agreements or representations and warranties made by the Company, services to be provided by the Company, intellectual property infringement claims made by third parties or, with respect to the sale of assets of a subsidiary, matters related to the Company's conduct of business and tax matters prior to the sale. From time to time, the Company indemnifies customers against combinations of loss, expense, or liability arising from various triggering events relating to the sale and use of its products and services.

In addition, the Company also provides indemnification to customers against claims related to undiscovered liabilities, additional product liability, or environmental obligations. The Company has also entered into indemnification agreements with its directors, officers and certain other personnel that will require the Company, among other things, to indemnify them against certain liabilities that may arise by reason of their status or service as directors or officers of the Company or certain of its affiliated entities. The Company maintains director and officer liability insurance, which may cover certain liabilities arising from its obligation to indemnify its directors, officers and certain other personnel in certain circumstances. It is not possible to determine the aggregate maximum potential loss under these agreements due to the limited history of prior claims and the unique facts and circumstances involved in each particular claim. Such indemnification obligations might not be subject to maximum loss clauses. Historically, the Company has not incurred material costs as a result of obligations under these agreements and it has not accrued any liabilities related to such indemnification obligations in the condensed consolidated financial statements.

Claims and Litigation

On October 12, 2012, GN Netcom, Inc. ("GN") sued the Company in the United States ("U.S.") District Court for the District of Delaware (“Court”), alleging violations of the Sherman Act, the Clayton Act, and Delaware common law. In its complaint, GN specifically alleged four causes of action: monopolization, attempted monopolization, concerted action in restraint of trade, and tortious interference with business relations. GN claimed that the Company dominates the market for headsets sold into contact centers in the U.S. and that a critical channel for sales of headsets to contact centers is through a limited network of specialized independent distributors (“SIDs”). GN asserted that the Company attracts SIDs through exclusive distributor agreements and alleged that the use of these agreements is illegal. GN sought injunctive relief, total damages in an unspecified amount, plus attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as unspecified legal and equitable relief.

The case was tried to a jury in October, 2017, resulting in a verdict in favor of the Company. GN filed a motion for new trial in November, 2017, and that motion was denied by the Court in January, 2018. The Company filed a motion for attorneys’ fees in November, 2017 and that motion was denied by the Court in January, 2018. The Company filed a motion for certain recoverable costs, and the parties stipulated to an immaterial amount, which GN will pay the Company. If the jury verdict were to be overturned on appeal, the Company would have to repay that amount to GN. GN has not indicated whether it plans to file an appeal of the jury’s verdict.

In a letter dated May 1, 2017, the Company received a Notice of Proposed Debarment from the General Services Administration ("GSA") informing the Company that the GSA has proposed that the Company be debarred from participation in Federal procurement and non-procurement programs based on the above spoliation order issued in the GN litigation matter. The Company submitted a response to the GSA demonstrating that it is a responsible contractor and that a suspension or debarment is neither necessary to protect the government nor warranted. The GSA found “no cause” for debarment of Plantronics and terminated the proceeding against the Company in August 2017.

In addition to the specific matter discussed above, the Company is involved in various legal proceedings arising in the normal course of conducting business. For such legal proceedings, where applicable, the Company has accrued an amount that reflects the aggregate liability deemed probable and estimable, but this amount is not material to the Company's financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. With respect to proceedings for which no accrual has been made, the Company is not able to estimate an amount or range of any reasonably possible additional losses because of the preliminary nature of many of these proceedings, the difficulty in ascertaining the applicable facts relating to many of these proceedings, the variable treatment of claims made in many of these proceedings, and the difficulty of predicting the settlement value of many of these proceedings. However, based upon the Company's historical experience, the resolution of these proceedings is not expected to have a material effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. The Company may incur substantial legal fees, which are expensed as incurred, in defending against these legal proceedings.