UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

FORM 10-K/A

Amendment No. 110-K

☒ Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended May 31, 20202021

or

☐ Transition Report Under Section 13 or 15(d) of The Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the transition period from _______to _______

Commission File Number: 0-8656001-38838

TSR, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

400 Oser Avenue, Hauppauge, NY 11788

(Address of principal executive offices)

Registrant’s telephone number: 631-231-0333

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. ☐ Yes   ☒ No

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15 (d) of the Exchange Act. ☐ Yes   ☒ No

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. ☒ Yes   ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of RegulationRegulations S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrantRegistrant was required to submit such files). ☒ Yes   ☐ No

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, “non-accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company”, and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the Registrant has elected not to use extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 7(a)(2)(B)13(a) of the Securities Act. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell companyCompany (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). ☐ Yes   ☐☒ No ☒

The aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant based upon the closing price of $3.20$7.25 at November 30, 20192020 was $3,169,000.$7,266,000.

The number of shares of the Registrant’s common stock (“Common Stock”) outstanding as of September 25, 2020August 16, 2021 was 1,962,062.

Documents incorporated by Reference:

The information required in Part III, Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 is incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Proxy Statement in connection with the 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed by the Registrant within 120 days after the close of its fiscal year.

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTSTSR, Inc.

Form 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended May 31, 2021

Table of Contents

PART I

Item 1. Business

General

TSR, Inc. (the “Company,” “TSR,” “we,” “us” and “our”) is a leading staffing company focused on recruiting Information Technology professionals for short and long term assignments, permanent placements, project work and providing contract computer programming services to its customers. The Company provides its customers with technical computer personnel to supplement their in-house information technology (“IT”) capabilities. The Company’s customers for its contract computer programming services consist primarily of Fortune 1000 companies with significant technology budgets. In the year ended May 31, 2021, the Company provided IT staffing services to 61 customers. Also, beginning in the year ended May 31, 2017, the Company has provided and continues to provide contract administrative (non-IT) workers to some of its significant IT customers, including services to provide administrative workers to new customers acquired following the acquisition of Geneva Consulting Group, Inc. (“Geneva”) on September 1, 2020, as discussed in Note 11 to the Consolidated Financial Statements elsewhere in this report.

The Company was incorporated in Delaware in 1969. The Company’s executive offices are located at 400 Oser Avenue, Suite 150, Hauppauge, NY 11788, and its telephone number is (631) 231-0333. This annual report, and each of our other periodic and current reports, including any amendments, are available, free of charge, on our website, www.tsrconsulting.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission. The information contained on our website is not incorporated by reference into this annual report on Form 10-K and should not be considered part of this report.

STAFFING SERVICES

The Company’s contract computer programming services involve the provision of technical staff to customers to meet the specialized requirements of their IT operations. The technical personnel provided by the Company generally supplement the in-house capabilities of the Company’s customers. The Company’s approach is to make available to its customers a broad range of technical personnel to meet their requirements rather than focusing on specific specialized areas. The Company has staffing capabilities in the areas of application development in .net and java, mobile applications for Android and IOS platforms, project management, IT security specialists, cloud development and architecture, business analysts, UI design and development, network infrastructure and support and database development and administration. The Company’s services provide customers with flexibility in staffing their day-to-day operations, as well as special projects, on a short-term or long-term basis.

The Company provides technical employees for projects, which usually range from three months to one year. Generally, customers may terminate projects at any time. Staffing services are typically provided at the client’s facility and are billed primarily on an hourly basis based on the actual hours worked by technical personnel provided by the Company and with reimbursement for out-of-pocket expenses. The Company pays its technical personnel on a semi-monthly basis and invoices its customers, not less frequently than monthly.

The Company’s success is dependent upon, among other things, its ability to attract, recruit and retain qualified professional IT personnel. The Company believes that there is significant competition for software professionals with the skills and experience necessary to perform the services offered by the Company. Although the Company generally has been successful in attracting employees with the skills needed to fulfill customer engagements, demand for qualified professionals conversant with certain technologies may outstrip supply as new and additional skills are required to keep pace with evolving computer technology or as competition for technical personnel increases. Increasing demand for qualified personnel could also result in increased expenses to hire and retain qualified technical personnel and could adversely affect the Company’s profit margins.

In the past several years, an increasing number of companies are using or are considering using low cost offshore outsourcing centers, particularly in India, to perform technology related work and projects. This trend has contributed to an industry wide decline in domestic IT staffing revenue in some segments. There can be no assurance that this trend will not continue to adversely impact the Company’s IT staffing revenue.

Beginning in the year ended May 31, 2017, the Company began to provide contract administrative (non-IT) workers to support some of its significant IT customers. This service was added at the customers’ request. The skills required for these positions are normally less demanding and the Company has hired a separate recruiting staff to handle this business, which includes both-in house and off-shore recruiters. There can be no assurance that the customers will continue to request these services.

OPERATIONS

The Company provides contract computer programming services primarily in the New York metropolitan area, New England, and the Mid-Atlantic region, although there are also customer locations around the country where the Company places contractors. The Company provides its services principally through offices located in Edison, New Jersey and Long Island, New York. The Company also leases an office space New York City, but has sublet its New York City office due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Competition from larger competitors for recruiters has created more turnover than expected and increased the cost of retaining recruiters, making it more difficult to increase the number of technical recruiters on staff. As of May 31, 2021, the Company employed 29 persons who are responsible for recruiting technical and non-technical personnel and 13 persons who are account executives. As of May 31, 2020, the Company had employed 24 technical and non-technical recruiters and 9 account executives. For some services, the Company also uses offshore recruiters. The number of offshore recruiters contracted by the Company fluctuates depending on demand for services. At May 31, 2021, the Company contracted for approximately 40 offshore recruiters to provide services to clients.

MARKETING AND CUSTOMERS

The Company focuses its marketing efforts on large businesses and institutions with significant IT budgets and recurring staffing and software development needs. The Company provided services to 61 customers during the year ended May 31, 2021 (“fiscal 2021”) as compared to 56 in the year ended May 31, 2020 (“fiscal 2020”). The Company has historically derived a significant percentage of its total revenue from a relatively small number of customers. In fiscal 2021, the Company had three customers which each provided more than 10% of consolidated revenues: Consolidated Edison (22.4%), Citigroup (19.9%), and AgileOne (11.9%). AgileOne provides vendor management services under an arrangement where the Company enters into a subcontract with AgileOne and AgileOne directly contracts with three end customers. The AgileOne end customers for which the Company provides services include Bristol Myers Squibb, which alone constituted 11.1% of the Company’s consolidated revenue for fiscal 2021. Additionally, the Company’s top ten customers (including underlying customers of vendor management companies) accounted for 81% of consolidated revenue in fiscal 2021 and 83% in fiscal 2020. While continuing its efforts to further expand its client base, including strategically targeted middle market accounts, the Company’s marketing efforts are focused primarily on increasing business from its existing accounts. Approximately 27% of the Company’s revenue is derived from end customers in the financial services business. Competitive pressures in financial services, primarily with European based banks, have negatively affected the net effective rates that the Company charges to certain of the Company’s end customers in this industry, which has negatively affected the Company’s gross profit margins.

Many of the Company’s major customers, totaling over 31% of revenue, have retained a third party to provide vendor management services and centralize the consultant hiring process. Under this system, the third party retains the Company to provide contract computer programming services, the Company bills the third party and the third party bills the ultimate customer. At certain customers, this process has weakened the relationships the Company has built with its customers’ project managers, who are the Company’s primary contacts with its customers and with whom the Company would normally work to place consultants. Instead, the Company is required to interface with the vendor management provider, making it more difficult to maintain its relationships with its customers and preserve and expand its business. In some cases, these changes have also reduced the Company’s profit margins because the vendor management company is retained for the purpose of keeping costs low for the end client and receives a processing fee which is deducted from the payment to the Company.

In accordance with industry practice, most of the Company’s contracts for contract computer programming services are terminable by either the client or the Company on short notice.

PROFESSIONAL STAFF AND RECRUITMENT

In addition to using internet-based job boards such as LinkedIn, Dice, Monster, Career Builder, Biospace and Discover.org, the Company maintains a database of technical personnel with a wide range of skills. The Company uses a sophisticated proprietary computer system to match potential employees’ skills and experience with client requirements. The Company periodically contacts personnel within its database to update their availability, skills, employment interests and other matters and continually updates its database. This database is made available to the account executives and recruiters at each of the Company’s offices.

The Company employs technical personnel primarily on an hourly basis, as required in order to meet the staffing requirements under particular contracts or for particular projects. The Company primarily recruits technical personnel by posting jobs on the Internet and, on occasion, by publishing advertisements in local newspapers and attending job fairs. The Company devotes significant resources to recruiting technical personnel, maintaining 29 technical recruiters based in the U.S. and contracting with companies for up to 40 offshore recruiters as needed to assist in locating both IT and administrative (non-IT) workers. Potential applicants are generally interviewed and tested by the Company’s recruiting personnel, by third parties that have the required technical backgrounds to review the qualifications of the applicants, or by on-line testing services. In some cases, instead of employing technical personnel directly, the Company uses subcontractors who employ the technical personnel who are provided to the Company’s customers. For a small fee, the Company may sometimes process payments on behalf of customers to contractors identified by the customers directly instead of through the normal recruiting process; this is known as “payrolling”.

Competition

The technical staffing industry is highly competitive and fragmented and has low barriers to entry. The Company competes for potential customers with providers of outsourcing services, systems integrators, computer systems consultants, other providers of technical staffing services and, to a lesser extent, temporary personnel agencies. Many of the Company’s competitors are significantly larger and have greater financial resources than the Company. The Company believes that the principal competitive factors in obtaining and retaining customers are accurate assessment of customers’ requirements, timely assignment of technical employees with appropriate skills and the price of services. The principal competitive factors in attracting qualified technical personnel are compensation, availability, quality and variety of projects and schedule flexibility. The Company believes that many of the technical personnel included in its database may also be pursuing other employment opportunities. Therefore, the Company believes that its responsiveness to the needs of technical personnel is an important factor in the Company’s ability to fill projects. Although the Company believes it competes favorably with respect to these factors, it expects competition to increase and there can be no assurance that the Company will remain competitive.

Intellectual Property Rights

The Company relies primarily upon a combination of trade secret, nondisclosure and other contractual arrangements to protect its proprietary rights. The Company generally enters into confidentiality agreements with its employees, consultants, customers and potential customers and limits access to and distribution of its proprietary information. There can be no assurance that the steps taken by the Company in this regard will be adequate to deter misappropriation of its proprietary information or that the Company will be able to detect unauthorized use and take appropriate steps to enforce its intellectual property rights.

Personnel

As of May 31, 2021, the Company had 606 full-time employees including its 2 executive officers. Of such employees, 13 were engaged in sales, 29 were recruiters for technical and non-technical personnel, 547 were IT and administrative (non-IT) contractors, and 15 were engaged in corporate administrative and clerical functions.

As of May 31, 2020, the Company had 338 full-time employees including its 2 executive officers. Of such employees, 9 were engaged in sales, 24 were recruiters for technical and non-technical personnel, 292 were IT and administrative (non-IT) contractors, and 11 were engaged in corporate administrative and clerical functions.

None of the Company’s employees belong to unions.

Forward-Looking Statements

Certain statements included incontained under this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended,Item 1A. “Risk Factors”, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and other filingsAnalysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Item 1. “Business”, including but not limited to statements concerning the Registrant under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”),Company’s future prospects and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), including statements as to the Registrant’s plans, future prospects andCompany’s future cash flow requirements are forward-looking statements, as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The words “believe,” “may,” “will,” “estimate,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “expect,” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from those set forthprojections in the forward-looking statements, due to known and unknownwhich statements involve risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to the following: factors set forth below

Forward-looking statements concerning the successreflect our current views with respect to future events and are based on currently available operating, financial and competitive information. We have no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of the Registrant’s plan for growth, both internal and through the previously announced pursuit of suitable acquisition candidates; the successful integration of announced acquisitions and any anticipated benefits therefrom; the impact of adverse economic conditions on client spending which have a negative impact on the Registrant’s business, which includes, but is not limitednew information, future events or risks, except to the current adverse economic conditions associated with the COVID-19 global health pandemic and the associated financial crisis, stay-at-home and other orders; risks relating to the competitive nature of the markets for contract computer programming services; the extent to which market conditions for the Registrant’s contract computer programming services will continue to adversely affect the Registrant’s business; the concentration of the Registrant’s business with certain customers; uncertainty as to the Registrant’s ability to maintain its relations with existing customers and expand its business; the impact of changes in the industry such as the use of vendor management companies in connection with the consultant procurement process; the increase in customers moving IT operations offshore; the Registrant’s ability to adapt to changing market conditions; the risks, uncertainties and expense of the legal proceedings to which the Registrant is a party; and other risks and uncertainties described in the Registrant’s filings under the Exchange Act.

In some cases,required by applicable law. If we do update one or more forward-looking statements, canno inference should be identified by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expects,” “plans,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of such termsdrawn that we will make additional updates with respect to those or other comparable terminology. Although the Registrant believes that the expectations reflected inforward-looking statements. New information, future events or risks could cause the forward-looking statements contained herein are reasonable, the Registrant cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. Moreover, neither the Registrant, nor any other person, assumes responsibility for the accuracy and completeness of such statements. The Registrant is under no dutyevents we discuss in this report not to update any of theoccur. You should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, contained herein afterwhich reflect our expectations only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as amended.report.

EXPLANATORY NOTEItem 1A. Risk Factors

TSR, Inc. (the “Company”)Our business, financial condition and results of operations have been and may continue to be negatively impacted by global health epidemics, including the recent COVID-19 outbreak.

Outbreaks of epidemic, pandemic, or contagious diseases such as COVID-19 have and may continue to have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. The spread of COVID-19 across the world has resulted in the World Health Organization declaring the outbreak of COVID-19 as a global pandemic. As the extent and duration of the COVID-19 outbreak is filing this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A (this “Amendment”) to its Form 10-K forstill unknown, international stock markets have experienced volatility reflecting the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020, which was fileduncertainty associated with the SEC on August 17, 2020 (the “Original Filing”).

This Amendment is being filed for the purpose of providing the information required by Items 10 through 14 of Part III of Form 10-K. This information was previously omitted from the Original Filing in reliance on General Instruction G(3) to Form 10-K, which permits the above-referenced Items to be incorporatedslow-down in the Annual Reportglobal economy and the resulting governmental responses to the pandemic. If COVID-19 continues to progress in ways that disrupt our customers’ demand for computer programing services or staffing needs or otherwise continues to disrupt our operations, such disruptions may continue to negatively affect, and may in the future materially affect, our operating results. The majority of our workforce and customer base is located in New Jersey and New York and typically works on-site at client locations. However, on Form 10-K by reference fromMarch 20, 2020 New York Governor Cuomo signed the New York State on PAUSE executive order, which includes a definitive proxy statement, if such definitive proxy statement is filed no later than 120 days afternew directive that all non-essential businesses statewide close in-office personnel functions effective March 22, 2020 to mitigate the last dayimpact of the Company’s fiscal year on May 31, 2020.

In accordance with Rule 12b-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), the cover page to the Original FilingCOVID-19 pandemic and Items 10 through 14 of Part III of the Original Filing are hereby amended and restated in their entirety. In addition, pursuant to Rule 12b-15 under the Exchange Act,we determined that the Company is including Item 15a non-essential business. In response to these public health directives and orders, we have implemented and maintained work-from-home policies for certain employees. The effects of Part IV, solelycontinued executive orders, stay at home orders and our work-from-home policies may negatively impact productivity, disrupt our business and impact our ability to fileservice our clients and our clients’ need for our services, the certifications required under Section 302magnitude of which will depend, in part, on the length and severity of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actrestrictions and other limitations on our ability to conduct our business in the ordinary course. Similar, and perhaps more severe, disruptions in our operations could negatively impact, and may materially negatively impact, our business, operating results and financial condition. Quarantines, shelter-in-place and similar government orders, or the perception that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions on the conduct of 2002 withbusiness operations could continue to occur, related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases could impact us and the business operations of our vendors and customers. Additionally, if the spread of COVID-19 limits our ability to make workers available either because they are ill or due to work-from-home orders, this Amendment.likely would negatively affect, and may materially negatively affect, our operating results, cash flow and business.

The full financial impact of the pandemic cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. The extent to which COVID-19 impacts our results will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted, including new information which may emerge concerning the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic and the actions taken globally to contain the COVID-19 pandemic or treat its impact, among others. Existing insurance coverage may not provide protection for all costs that may arise from all such possible events. We continue to assess our business operations and system supports and the impact COVID-19 may have on our results and financial condition, but there can be no assurance that this analysis will enable us to avoid part or all of any impact from the spread of COVID-19 or its consequences, including downturns in business sentiment generally or in our sector in particular.

Except as described above, noOur success depends on our management team and other changes have been made tokey personnel, the Original Filing. This Amendment No. 1 does not affectloss of any other sectionof whom could disrupt our business operations.

Christopher Hughes, former Chairman of the Original Filing not otherwise discussed hereinBoard, Chief Executive Officer, President and continues to speak as of the date of the Original Filing. The Company has not updated the disclosures contained in the Original Filing to reflect any events that occurred subsequent to the date of the Original Filing. Accordingly, this Amendment No. 1 should be read in conjunction with the Company’s other filings made with the SEC subsequent to the filing of the Original Filing.

PART III

Directors and Executive Officers

Set forth below are the names, ages and positions and offices held with the Company of each director and executive officer of the Company. Directors are classified as either Class I, Class II or Class III directors, with each class serving for a term of three (3) years. The term of Class I directors is set to expire at the 2021 annual meeting of stockholders of the Company. The term of Class II directors is set to expire at the 2020 annual meeting of stockholders, and the term of Class III directors is set to expire at the 2019 annual meeting of stockholders. There is currently no Class III directorTreasurer, was terminated on theFebruary 29, 2020. The Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”).elected Thomas Salerno, formerly branch manager of the New Jersey office of TSR Consulting Services, Inc. to succeed Mr. Hughes as Chief Executive officers serve until such timeOfficer, President and Treasurer. The Company is dependent on Thomas Salerno in his corporate positions and as their successorPresident of TSR Consulting Services, Inc. The Company has an employment agreement with Mr. Salerno which expires November 2, 2023. The Company is duly electedalso dependent on certain of its account executives who are responsible for servicing its principal customers and qualifies.attracting new customers. The Company generally does not have employment contracts with the account executives. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to retain its existing personnel or find and attract additional qualified employees. The loss of the service of any of these personnel could have a material adverse effect on the Company.

There are no family relationships between any of the Company’s executive officers and directors. None of the Company’s directors currently serves, or has served during the past five years, as a director of any company with a class of securities registered pursuant to Section 12 of the Exchange Act or subject to the requirements of Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act or any company registered as an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940. There is no arrangement between any director or director nominee and any other person pursuant to which he was or is to be selected as a director or director nominee except that Mr. Eriksen and Mr. Tirpak were nominated by Zeff Capital, L.P. as Class I directors at the Company’s 2018 annual meeting of stockholders held on October 22, 2019 in accordance with the terms and conditions of that certain settlement and release agreement, dated August 30, 2019, between the Company and certain investor parties, including Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC and Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc. and Robert Fitzgerald, and Fintech Consulting, LLC and Tajuddin Haslani (the “Settlement Agreement”). The terms of the Settlement Agreement are more fully described in the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 3, 2019. Mr. Eriksen and Mr. Tirpak were subsequently elected as directors at the annual meeting of shareholders on October 22, 2019.

Biographical Information

Mr. Bradly M. Tirpak was elected as a Class I director of theThe Company at the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders on October 22, 2019. He was appointed as the Chairman of the Board on December 30, 2019. Mr. Tirpak is a professional investorcurrently subject to ongoing litigation with more than 25 years of investing experience. Since September 2016, he has served as a portfolio manager and Managing Director at Palm Active Partners, LLC, a private investment company. From October 2008 to August 2016, Mr. Tirpak served as Managing Member of Locke Partners, LLC, a private investment company. He also previously served as a portfolio manager at Credit Suisse First Boston, Caxton Associates and Sigma Capital Management and Chilton Investment Company. Mr. Tirpak served as a director at Applied Minerals, Inc., a publicly traded specialty materials company, from April 2015 to March 2017, as a director at Flowgroup plc, an energy supply and services businessits former CEO which, like other future lawsuits or investigations, could divert our resources or result in the United Kingdom, from June 2017 to October 2018 and as a director at Birner Dental Management Services, Inc., a dental service organization, from December 2017 to January 2019. Since December of 2014, Mr. Tirpak has served as a director of Full House Resorts, Inc., a publicly traded gaming company, and since October of 2019 as a director of Liberated Syndication Inc., a publicly traded provider of podcast and webhosting services, and since April of 2020 as a director of Barnwell Industries Inc., a publicly traded company engaged in real estate development and oil and gas exploration. Mr. Tirpak also currently serves as trustee of The Halo Trust, the world’s largest humanitarian mine clearance organization focused on clearing the debris of war currently operating in over 25 countries. Mr. Tirpak earned a B.S.M.E. from Tufts University and an M.B.A. from Georgetown University.substantial liabilities.

The Company believes that Mr. Tirpak is currently subject to a valuable member oflitigation involving the Board due to his knowledge and experience in investing, capital allocation and corporate governance, as well as his experience serving on the boards of publicly traded companies.

Mr. H. Timothy Eriksen was elected as a Class I director of the Company at the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders on October 22, 2019. He was appointed by the Board as the Chairman of the Audit Committee of the Board on December 30, 2019. Mr. Eriksen founded Eriksen Capital Management, a Lynden, Washington-based investment advisory firm (“ECM”), in 2005. Mr. Eriksen is the President of ECM. Mr. Eriksen is theCompany’s former Chief Executive Officer, as discussed in the “Legal Proceedings” section. In connection with this litigation, the Company may enter into a settlement of claims for significant monetary damages. The Company may also be subject to a judgment for significant monetary damages. Defending against and/or prosecuting the current litigation may be time-consuming, expensive and Chief Financial Officercause diversion of management’s attention.

In the future, we may additionally be subject to legal or administrative proceedings and since July 2015 has been a director of, Solitron Devices, Inc. (“Solitron”). Solitron designs, develops, manufactureslitigation which may be costly to defend and markets solid-state semiconductor componentscould materially harm our business, financial conditions and related devices primarilyoperations. With respect to any litigation, the Company’s insurance may not reimburse it or may not be sufficient to reimburse it for the militaryself-insured retention that the Company is required to satisfy before any insurance applies to a claim, unreimbursed legal fees or an adverse result in any litigation. Such event may adversely impact the Company’s business, operating results or financial condition.

Our business may be materially and aerospace markets. Since April 2018, Mr. Eriksen has beenadversely impacted if our relationship with one or more of our major customers is lost or disrupted.

In fiscal 2021, the Company’s three largest customers, Consolidated Edison, Citigroup and AgileOne, accounted for 22.4%, 19.9%, and 11.9% of the Company’s consolidated revenue, respectively. Any disruptions in our relationships with our significant customers may have a directormaterially adverse impact on our financial condition and results of Novation Companies, Inc. (“Novation”). Novation owns Healthcare Staffing, Inc.,operations. AgileOne is a vendor management company through which among other activities,the Company provides outsourced healthcare staffing and related services. Priorservices to founding ECM, Mr. Eriksen workedthree end customers, of which Bristol Myers Squibb is the most significant, representing 11.1% of the Company’s consolidated revenue for Walker’s Manual, Inc., a publisherfiscal 2021. In total, the Company derives over 31% of books and newsletters on micro-cap stocks, unlisted stocks and community banks. Earlierits revenue from accounts with vendor management companies. The Company’s 10 largest customers provided 81% of consolidated revenue in his career, Mr. Eriksen worked for Kiewit Pacific Co, a subsidiary of Peter Kiewit Sons, as an administrative engineerfiscal 2021. Client contract terms vary depending on the Benicia Martinez Bridge project. Mr. Eriksen receivednature of the engagement, and there can be no assurance that a B.A.client will renew a contract when it terminates. In addition, the Company’s contracts are generally cancelable by the client at any time on short notice, and customers may unilaterally reduce their use of the Company’s services under such contracts without penalty. For example, one of the Company’s 10 largest customers has significantly reduced their use of the Company’s services as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Approximately 27% of the Company’s revenue is derived from The Master’s University and an M.B.A. from Texas A&M University.end customers in the financial services business. Competitive pressures in financial services, primarily with European based banks, have negatively affected the net effective rates that the Company charges to certain end customers in this industry, which has negatively affected the Company’s gross profit margins. These banks are no longer willing to pay the premium prices which they had previously paid for certain high-end skills. See “Rapidly Changing Industry” below.

In accordance with industry practice, most of the Company’s contracts for contract computer programming services are terminable by either the client or the Company on short notice.

The Company believes that Mr. Eriksen is a valuable memberaccounts receivable balances associated with the Company’s largest customers were $4,545,000 for three customers at May 31, 2021 and $3,747,000 for three customers at May 31, 2020. Because of the Board basedsignificant amount of outstanding receivables that the Company may have with its larger customers at any one time, if a client, including a vendor management company which then contracts with the ultimate client, filed for bankruptcy protection or otherwise sought to modify payment terms, it could prevent the Company from collecting on his strong businessthe receivables and financial background, and his experience serving in leadership- and management-level roles with responsibility for formulating business and operational strategy.have an adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations.

Mr. Robert Fitzgerald was appointed as a Class II directorDamage to our reputation may adversely affect our customer relationships and our business, financial condition and results of the Company by the Board on December 30, 2019. Mr. Fitzgerald is a seasoned business executive with over 25 years of experience helping companies grow. From 1999 through 2008, he served as the CEO of YDI/Proxim Wireless, an early pioneer of the wireless networking equipment industry. From 2009 through 2010, he served as a consultant and later the President of Ubiquiti Networks, now Ubiquiti, Inc. (NYSE: UI), a world leading provider of wireless and non-wireless networking equipment. He currently serves as the CEO of QAR Industries, Inc., an investment company that holds interests in a portfolio of public and private companies, including Antenna Products Corporation and SeeView Securities, Inc. Mr. Fitzgerald earned a Bachelor of Arts in Economics and Juris Doctorate from the University of California, Los Angeles.operations.

The Company believes that Mr. Fitzgerald’s extensive experience in and knowledge of the information technology (“IT”) industry and career serving in management-level positions for public and private companies make him a valuable member of the Board.

Thomas Salerno was appointed President, Chief Executive Officer and Treasurer of the Company effective as of March 23, 2020. Since 2011, Mr. Salerno had served as the Managing Director of TSR Consulting Services, Inc., the Company’s IT consulting services subsidiary and largest business unit. Mr. Salerno has over 20 years of experience in the technology consulting industry. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Salerno spent eight years at Open Systems Technology as Associate Director, two years as Vice President of Sales and Recruiting for Versatech Consulting, and three years as an Account Representative for Robert Half Technologies. Mr. Salerno holds a Bachelor’s Degree from Johnson and Wales University.

Mr. John G. Sharkey was appointed Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of the Company effective June 1, 2019. He had served as the Vice President, Finance, Controller and Secretary of the Company since 1990. Mr. Sharkey received a Master’s Degree in Finance from Adelphi University and received his Certified Public Accountant certification from the State of New York. From 1987 until joining the Company in October 1990, Mr. Sharkey was Controller of a publicly-held electronics manufacturer. From 1984 to 1987, he served as Deputy Auditor of a commercial bank, having responsibility over the internal audit department. Prior to 1984, Mr. Sharkey was employed by KPMG LLP as a senior accountant.

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act requires the Company’s officers and directors and persons who beneficially own more than ten percent of a registered class of the Company’s equity securities to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). Officers, directors and greater than ten percent Stockholders are required by regulation of the SEC to furnish the Company with copies of all Section 16(a) forms they file.

Based solely onreputation among its review of the copies of such forms received by it, or written representations from certain reporting persons that no Forms 5 were required for those persons, the Company believes that all of its officers, directors and greater than ten percent beneficial owners complied with all filing requirements applicable to them with respect to reports required to be filed by Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020.

Code of Ethics

The Company has adopted a code of ethics that applies to all of its employees, including the chief executive officer and chief financial and accounting officer. The code of ethics is available on the Investor Relations page of the Company’s website at www.tsrconsulting.com. The Company intends to post on its website all disclosures that are required by law or NASDAQ Capital Market listing standards concerning any amendments to, or waivers from, the Company’s code of ethics. Stockholders may request a free copy of the code of ethics by writing to Corporate Secretary, TSR, Inc., 400 Oser Avenue, Suite 150, Hauppauge, NY 11788. Disclosure regarding any amendments to, or waivers from, provisions of the code of ethics that apply to the Company’s directors or principal executive and financial officers will be included in a Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC within four business days following the date of the amendment or waiver, unless website posting of such amendments or waivers is then permitted by the rules of the NASDAQ Capital Marketcustomers, potential customers and the SEC.

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee’s current members are H. Timothy Eriksen, Bradly M. Tirpak and Robert Fitzgerald. Each ofstaffing services industry depends on the members of the Audit Committee is an independent director under the rules of the NASDAQ Capital Market. The Audit Committee’s primary functions are to assist the Board in monitoring the integrity of the Company’s financial statements and systems of internal control. The Audit Committee has direct responsibility for the appointment, independence and performance of the Company’s independent auditors. The Audit Committee is responsible for pre-approving any engagements oftechnical personnel that the Company places with its customers. If the Company’s independent auditors. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter approvedcustomers are not satisfied with the services provided by the Board on September 16, 2004, and amended as of October 10, 2008. A copy oftechnical personnel placed by the Audit Committee Charter is available onCompany, or if the Investor Relations page oftechnical personnel placed by the Company lack the qualifications or experience necessary to perform the services required by the Company’s website at www.tsrconsulting.com.customers, the Company may not be able to successfully maintain its relationships with its customers or expand its client base.

The Board has determined that H. Timothy Eriksen, the Chairman of the Audit Committee, Bradley M. Tirpak and Robert Fitzgerald all meet the requirements of an “audit committee financial expert” as such term is defined in applicable regulations of the SEC.

Executive Compensation

The following table sets forth information concerning the annual and long-term compensation of the Named Executive Officers (as defined below) for services in all capacities to the Company for the fiscal years ended May 31, 2020 and 2019. The Named Executive Officers for the fiscal years ended May 31, 2020 and 2019 are (1) Thomas Salerno, our President and Chief Executive Officer; (2) John G. Sharkey, our Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; and (3) Christopher Hughes, who served as President and Chief Executive Officer prior to his removal effective February 29, 2020 (the “Named Executive Officers”).

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

Outstanding Equity AwardsWe operate in a competitive market for technical personnel, account executives and technical recruiters and disruptions to our business may result if we fail to attract and retain qualified personnel to operate our business and service our customers.

The Company’s success is dependent upon its ability to attract and retain qualified computer professionals to provide as temporary personnel to its customers. Competition for the limited number of qualified professionals with a working knowledge of certain sophisticated computer languages, which the Company requires for its contract computer services business, is intense. The Company believes that there is a shortage of, and significant competition for, software professionals with the skills and experience necessary to perform the services offered by the Company.

The Company’s ability to maintain and renew existing engagements and obtain new business in its contract computer programming business depends, in large part, on its ability to hire and retain technical personnel with the IT skills that keep pace with continuing changes in software evolution, industry standards and technologies, and client preferences. Although the Company generally has been successful in attracting employees with the skills needed to fulfill customer engagements, demand for qualified professionals conversant with certain technologies may outstrip supply as new and additional skills are required to keep pace with evolving computer technology or as competition for technical personnel increases. Increased demand for qualified personnel has resulted and is expected to continue to result in increased expenses to hire and retain qualified technical personnel and has adversely affected the Company’s profit margins.

The Company faces a highly competitive market for hiring and retaining account executives and technical recruiters, which could affect the Company’s ability to hire and retain such personnel, including by increasing the costs of doing so. If the Company is successful in hiring technical recruiters and account executives, there can be no assurance that such hiring will result in increased revenue.

We operate in a rapidly changing industry and a reduction in demand for our technical staffing services may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The computer industry is characterized by rapidly changing technology and evolving industry standards. These include the overall increase in the sophistication and interdependency of computer technology and a focus by IT managers on cost-efficient solutions. There can be no assurance that these changes will not adversely affect demand for technical staffing services. Organizations may elect to perform such services in-house or outsource such functions to companies that do not utilize temporary staffing, such as that provided by the Company.

Additionally, a number of companies have, in recent years, limited the number of vendors on their approved vendor lists, and are continuing to do so. In some cases, this has required the Company to subcontract with a company on the approved vendor list to provide services to customers. The staffing industry has also experienced margin erosion caused by this increased competition, and customers leveraging their buying power by consolidating the number of vendors with which they deal. In addition to these factors, there has been intense price competition in the area of IT staffing, pressure on billing rates and pressure by customers for discounts. The Company has endeavored to increase its technical recruiting staff in order to better respond to customers’ increasing demands for both the timeliness, quality and quantities of resume submittals against job requisitions.

The Company cannot predict at Fiscal Year Endthis time what long-term effect these changes will have on the Company’s business and results of operations.

The increase in our customers’ use of third-party vendor management companies may weaken our relationship with our customers and adversely impact our ability to development and expand customer relationships.

There were no outstanding equity awards athave been changes in the endindustry which have affected the Company’s operating results. Many customers have retained third parties to provide vendor management services, and in excess of 31% of the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020.

Employment Agreements and Arrangements

Employment AgreementCompany’s revenue is derived through business with Thomas Salerno

On July 11, 2018, TSR Consulting Services, Inc. entered into a written employment agreement with Thomas Salerno (the “Salerno Employment Agreement).vendor management companies. The Salerno Employment Agreement expires July 10, 2021 (“Expiration Date”) and any continued employment will be on an “at-will” basis. The Salerno Employment Agreement providedthird party is then responsible for an annualized base salaryretaining companies to provide temporary IT personnel. This results in the amount of $250,000,Company contracting with such third parties and not directly with the ultimate customer. This change weakens the Company’s relationship with its customer, which has been increased to $350,000 in connection with Mr. Salerno’s appointment to the chief executive officer position. In addition to base salary, the Salerno Employment Agreement provides that Mr. Salerno will receive a car allowance and will be eligible to receive an annual cash bonusmakes it more difficult for each fiscal year in an amount determined by the company. In connection with Mr. Salerno’s appointment to the chief executive officer position, the Company to maintain and expand its business with its existing customers. It also paid him a sign-on bonus of $25,000.reduces the Company’s profit margins.

In addition, the agreements with the vendor management companies are frequently structured as subcontracting agreements, with the vendor management company entering into a services agreement directly with the end customers. As a result, in the event that the company terminates Mr. Salerno’s employment other than (a) for “Cause” (as defined in the Salerno Employment Agreement), (b) as a result of Mr. Salerno’s death or disability or, (c) due to the expiration of the term, both (A) prior to the Expiration Date and (B) upon, within one year following the consummation of a Change in Control (as defined inbankruptcy of a vendor management company, the Salerno Employment Agreement), then in additionCompany’s ability to Mr. Salerno’s Accrued Obligations (as defined in the Salerno Employment Agreement), (i) the company shall be obligated to pay to Mr. Salerno a severance payment equal to the sum of (A) one year of his base salary (at the rate in effect on the termination date) plus (B) one times the amount of the annual bonus paid to him in the prior fiscal year (collectively, the “Severance Payment”); (ii) if Mr. Salerno timely elects tocollect its outstanding receivables and continue and maintain group health plan coverage pursuant to the Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1985, as amended (“COBRA”), the company will reimburse him for a portion of the healthcare continuation payments under COBRA actually paid by him for the coverage period ending on the earlier of (A) the one year anniversary of his termination date, and (B) the date he becomes eligible to obtain healthcare coverage from a new employer (the “COBRA Assistance Period”), which portion will be equal to (x) the amount of the monthly health care premium payment under COBRA actually paid by him for COBRA coverage during the COBRA Assistance Period, less (y) the amount he would have been required to contribute toward health insurance coverage during the COBRA Assistance Period if he had remained an active employee of the company (the “COBRA Assistance”). The company’s obligation to provide the Severance Payment and COBRA Assistance to Mr. Salerno shallservices could be contingent upon his executing a general release of all claims against the Company, its subsidiaries and their respective officers, directors, shareholders, partners, members, employees, agents and related parties in a form satisfactory to the company.adversely affected.

The Salerno Employment Agreement incorporates the terms and provisions of a Maintenance of Confidence and Non-Compete Agreement between the company and Mr. Salerno dated as of June 16, 2011. The Maintenance of Confidence and Non-Compete Agreement sets forth Mr. Salerno’s covenants against the disclosure of confidential information and covenants against the solicitation of customers, employees and independent contractors (all in accordance with the terms set forth therein).

On May 24, 2019, the Company entered into a written amendedWe have experienced limited growth in our business and restated employment agreement with John G. Sharkey (the “Sharkey Employment Agreement”) that superseded the employment agreement that the Company and Mr. Sharkey had entered into in June 2015. The Sharkey Employment Agreement terminates May 31, 2020 and automatically renews for successive renewal terms of one (1) year each unless either party gives notice of non-renewal to the other party at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the initial term or the then-current renewal term. The Sharkey Employment Agreement provides for an annualized base salary in the amount of $285,000 for the period from June 1, 2019 through December 31, 2019. Beginning January 1, 2020, the annualized base salary increases to the amount of $310,000. Thereafter, the Compensation Committee will review Mr. Sharkey’s base salary on an annual basis and the Board may increase his base salary, in its sole discretion. In addition to base salary, the Sharkey Employment Agreement provides that Mr. Sharkey will be eligible to receive an annual cash bonus for each fiscal year in an amount determined by the Compensation Committee in its sole discretion and subject to the approval of the Board, which may be based upon standards that the Compensation Committee establishes with Mr. Sharkey, subject to the Board’s approval. The target amount of the annual bonus will not be less than $85,000, provided that the actual amount of the annual bonus may be higher or lower than the target amount. The Sharkey Employment Agreement further provides that the Company pay Mr. Sharkey an annual bonus in the amount of $75,000 for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2019, which is the annual bonus that is to be paid to Mr. Sharkey under the terms of the Mr. Sharkey’s former employment agreement for the fiscal year ending May 31, 2019 and which the Company paid in a lump sum. As set forth in the Summary Compensation Table above, the Company did not pay an annual bonus to Mr. Sharkey for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020.

In the event that (a) the Company terminates Mr. Sharkey’s employment without “Cause” (as defined in the Sharkey Employment Agreement), (b) Mr. Sharkey terminates his employment for “Good Reason” (as defined in the Sharkey Employment Agreement) or (c) Mr. Sharkey’s employment terminates upon the expiration of the termrecent economic uncertainties, including as a result of the Company providingCOVID-19 pandemic, have decreased customer demand for our services and our results of operations may continue to be adversely impacted if economic uncertainties exist and demand for our services continues to decrease or plateau as a noticeresult.

Demand for the Company’s IT staffing services has been and is significantly affected by the general economic environment. During periods of non-renewal of the then-current term of the Sharkey Employment Agreement, then Mr. Sharkey will be entitled to receive the following: (i)slowing economic activity, customers may reduce their IT projects and their demand for outside consultants. Therefore, any significant economic downturn could have a severance payment equal to the sum of (x) 1.5 times Mr. Sharkey’s annual base salary at the rate inmaterial adverse effect on the dateCompany’s results of termination, (y) 1.5 times Mr. Sharkey’s annual bonus based on the bonus awarded to him for the fiscal year prior to the fiscal year in which the date of termination occurred, and (z)operations. The COVID-19 outbreak in the caseUnited States has caused business disruption through mandated and voluntary closing of a termination byvarious businesses. While the disruption is currently expected to be temporary, there is considerable uncertainty around the duration of the closings and the ongoing economic impact. Therefore, the Company without “Cause” or a termination by Mr. Sharkey for “Good Reason,”expects this matter to continue to negatively impact its operating results in future periods. However, the base salaryfull financial impact and duration cannot be reasonably estimated at this time. The Company expects that Mr. Sharkey would have received if he had remained employed fromeconomic conditions will continue to affect the datenumber of termination through the last day of the initial term or then-current renewal term, which severance payment will be payable in a single lump sumconsultants on billing with customers and the Company’s first regular pay date following the date on which the General Release (as defined in the Sharkey Employment Agreement) becomes effective; (ii) payment of the full bonus for the fiscal year in which the date of termination occurs (the “Termination Year Bonus”), which Termination Year Bonus will be based on the bonus awarded to Mr. Sharkey for the fiscal year prior to the fiscal year in which the date of termination occurred and will be payable within thirty (30) days following the date of termination; (iii) continued medical and dental insurance benefits for Mr. Sharkey and his family that are at least comparable to the benefits generally offered to all eligible Company employees until the earlier of (x) the two-year anniversary of Mr. Sharkey’s employment termination date, and (y) the date that Mr. Sharkey is eligible for comparable coverage under the group health insurance plans of another employer; and (iv) for two (2) years following the date of termination, the Company will reimburse Mr. Sharkey for the monthly cost of his car lease, subject to certain parameters described in the Sharkey Employment Agreement.profitability. In addition to the foregoing benefits,impact of the economic uncertainties, the Company has not been successful in expanding its customer base beyond its core customers. There is no assurance that the Company will alsoachieve growth in its revenue.

Increases in payroll-related costs coupled with an inability to increase our fees charged to customers to cover such costs has, and may likely continue to have, an adverse effect on our profitability.

The Company is required to pay Mr. Sharkey the Accrued Obligations (as defineda number of federal, state and local payroll and related costs, including unemployment insurance, workers’ compensation insurance, employer’s portion of Social Security and Medicare taxes, among others, for our employees, including those placed with customers. Significant increases in the Sharkey Employment Agreement). Witheffective rates of any payroll-related costs would likely have a material adverse effect on the exceptionCompany. During the past few years, many of the Accrued Obligationsstates in which the Company conducts business have significantly increased their state unemployment tax rates in an effort to increase funding for unemployment benefits. Costs have continued to increase as a result of health care reforms and the Termination Year Bonus,mandate to provide health insurance to employees under the Affordable Care Act. New York and New Jersey implemented laws over the last several years that require employers to provide certain minimum benefits for employees with respect to paid sick leave and family leave, which has and will continue to increase our payroll-related costs. Many other cities around the country have enacted or are in the process of enacting similar mandates. The Company has not been able to sufficiently increase the fees charged to its customers to cover these mandated cost increases. There are also proposals on the federal and state levels to phase in paid or partially paid family leave. The enacted mandates have had a negative effect on the Company’s obligationprofitability and additional mandates will continue to paynegatively impact the foregoing benefits is subjectCompany’s margins.

The current trend of companies moving technology jobs and projects offshore has caused and could continue to Mr. Sharkey’s execution and non-revocation of a general release of claims against the Company, and his continued compliance with all post-termination covenants.cause revenue to decline.

In the eventpast few years, more companies are using or are considering using low cost offshore outsourcing centers, particularly in India and other East Asian countries, to perform technology related work and projects. This trend has reduced the growth in domestic IT staffing revenue for the industry. This trend has had a negative impact on our business and there can be no assurance that either (a)it will not continue to adversely impact the Company’s IT staffing revenue.

Because much of our technical personnel consists of foreign nationals with work visas, changes in immigration laws that restrict the provision of work visas may adversely affect our ability to retain qualified technical personnel.

The Company obtains many of its technical personnel by subcontracting with companies that utilize foreign nationals entering the U.S. on work visas, primarily under the H-1B visa classification. The Company also sponsors foreign nationals on H-1B visas on a limited basis. The H-1B visa classification enables U.S. employers to hire qualified foreign nationals in positions that require an education at least equal to a bachelor’s degree. U.S. Immigration laws and regulations are subject to legislative and administrative changes, as well as changes in the application of standards and enforcement. In June 2020, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation suspending immigration visas for many categories of foreign workers including H-1B through the end of the year, allegedly to protect U.S. workers and jobs amid the COVID-19 pandemic. These and future restrictions on the availability of work visas could restrain the Company’s ability to acquire the skilled professionals needed to meet our customers’ requirements, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. The scope and impact of these changes on the staffing industry and the Company terminates Mr. Sharkey’s employmentremain unclear, however a narrow interpretation and vigorous enforcement of existing laws and regulations could adversely affect the ability of entities with which the Company subcontracts to utilize foreign nationals and/or renew existing foreign national consultants on assignment. There can be no assurance that the Company or its subcontractors will be able to keep or replace all foreign nationals currently on assignment, or continue to acquire foreign national talent at the same rates as in the past.

We experience fluctuations in our quarterly operating results.

The Company’s revenue and operating results are subject to significant variations from quarter-to-quarter. Revenue is subject to fluctuation based upon a number of factors, including the timing and number of client projects commenced and completed during the quarter, delays incurred in connection with projects, the growth rate of the market for “Cause,” (b) Mr. Sharkey terminates his employment without “Good Reason”contract computer programming services and general economic conditions. Unanticipated termination of a project or (c) Mr. Sharkey’s employment terminatesthe decision by a client not to proceed to the next stage of a project anticipated by the Company could result in decreased revenue and lower utilization rates which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, operating results and financial condition. Compensation levels can be impacted by a variety of factors, including competition for highly skilled employees and inflation.

The Company’s operating results also fluctuate due to his death, disability orseasonality. Typically, our billable hours, which directly affect our revenue and profitability, decrease in our third fiscal quarter. Clients closing during the expirationholiday season and for winter weather normally causes the number of billable workdays for consultants on billing with customers to decrease. Additionally, at the beginning of the then-current termcalendar year, which also falls within our third fiscal quarter, payroll taxes are at their highest. This typically results in our lowest gross margins of the Sharkey Employment Agreementyear. The Company’s operating results are also subject to fluctuation as a result of Mr. Sharkey providingother factors such as vacations, client mandated furloughs and client budgeting requirements.

We believe competition in our industry and for qualified personnel will increase, and there can be no assurance that we will remain competitive.

The technical staffing industry is highly competitive, fragmented and has low barriers to entry. The Company competes for potential customers with providers of outsourcing services, systems integrators, computer systems consultants, other providers of technical staffing services and, to a noticelesser extent, temporary personnel agencies. The Company competes for technical personnel with other providers of non-renewal, thentechnical staffing services, systems integrators, providers of outsourcing services, computer systems consultants, customers and temporary personnel agencies. Many of the Company’s solecompetitors are significantly larger and have greater financial resources than the Company. The Company believes that the principal competitive factors in obtaining and retaining customers are accurate assessment of customers’ requirements, timely assignment of technical employees with appropriate skills and the price of services. The principal competitive factors in attracting qualified technical personnel are compensation, availability, quality and variety of projects and schedule flexibility. The Company believes that many of the technical personnel included in its database may also be pursuing other employment opportunities. Therefore, the Company believes that its responsiveness to the needs of technical personnel is an important factor in the Company’s ability to fill projects. Although the Company believes it competes favorably with respect to these factors, it expects competition to increase, and there can be no assurance that the Company will remain competitive.

The Company is exposed to contract and other liability, and there can be no assurance that our contracts and insurance coverage would adequately protect the Company from such liability or related claims or litigation.

The personnel provided by the Company to customers provide services involving key aspects of its customers’ software applications. A failure in providing these services could result in a claim for substantial damages against the Company, regardless of the Company’s responsibility for such failure. The Company attempts to limit, contractually, its liability for damages arising from negligence or omissions in rendering services, but it is not always successful in negotiating such limits.

Furthermore, due to increased competition and the requirements of vendor management companies, the Company may be required to accept less favorable terms regarding limitations on liability, including assuming obligations to Mr. Sharkey shall be: (i)indemnify customers for damages sustained in connection with the paymentprovision of Mr. Sharkey’s accrued but unpaid base salary andour services. There can be no assurance our contracts will include the desired limitations of liability or that the limitations of liability set forth in our contracts would be enforceable or would otherwise protect the Company from liability for damages.

The Company’s business expenses incurred by Mr. Sharkey that had not yet been reimbursed; (ii) ininvolves assigning personnel to the case of a termination by Mr. Sharkey without “Good Reason” or a termination due to Mr. Sharkey’s death or disability, a pro-rated bonus for the fiscal year in which the date of termination occurs (calculated based on the bonus awarded for the prior fiscal year and pro-rated based upon the number of days that Mr. Sharkey was employed in the fiscal year in which the date of termination occurs) (the “Pro-Rata Bonus”); and (iii) in the caseworkplace of the expirationclient, typically under the client’s supervision. Although the Company has little control over the client’s workplace, the Company may be exposed to claims of the then-current term of the Sharkey Employment Agreementdiscrimination and harassment and other similar claims as a result of Mr. Sharkey providing a notice of non-renewal, his Termination Year Bonus (calculated based oninappropriate actions allegedly taken against the bonus awarded forCompany’s personnel by customers. As an employer, the prior fiscal year).Company is also exposed to other possible employment-related claims. The Company is exposed to liability with respect to actions taken by its technical personnel while on a project, such as damages caused by technical personnel errors, misuse of client proprietary information or theft of client property. To reduce these exposures, the Company maintains insurance policies and a fidelity bond covering general liability, workers’ compensation claims, errors and omissions and employee theft. In certain instances, the Company indemnifies its customers for these exposures. Certain of these costs and liabilities are not covered by insurance. There can be no assurance that insurance coverage will paycontinue to be available and at its current price or that it will be adequate to, or will, cover any such liability.

Our business and our reputation could be adversely affected by a data security incident or the Accrued Obligations,failure to protect sensitive client, employee and Company data, or the Pro-Rata Bonusfailure to comply with applicable regulations relating to data security and privacy.

Our ability to protect client, employee, and Company data and information is critical to our reputation and the Termination Year Bonussuccess of our business. Our clients and employees expect that their confidential, personal and private information will be secure in our possession. Attacks against security systems have become increasingly sophisticated along with developments in technology, and such attacks have become more prevalent. Consequently, the regulatory environment surrounding cybersecurity and privacy has become more and more demanding and has resulted in new requirements and increasingly demanding standards for protection of information. As a single lump sum within thirty (30) days followingresult, the dateCompany may incur increased expenses associated with adequately protecting confidential client, employee, and Company data and complying with applicable regulatory requirements. There can be no assurance that we will be able to prevent unauthorized third parties from breaching our systems and gaining unauthorized access to confidential client, employee, and Company data even if our cybersecurity measures are compliant with regulatory requirements and standards. Unauthorized third party access to confidential client, employee, and Company data stored in our system whether as a result of termination.a third party system breach, systems failure or employee negligence, fraud or misappropriation, could damage our reputation and cause us to lose customers, and could subject us to monetary damages, fines and/or criminal prosecution. Furthermore, unauthorized third-party access to or through our information systems or those we develop for our customers, whether by our employees or third parties, could result in system disruptions, negative publicity, legal liability, monetary damages, and damage to our reputation.

While we take steps to protect our intellectual property rights and proprietary information, there can be no assurance that the Company can prevent misappropriation of such rights and information.

The Sharkey Employment Agreement incorporatesCompany relies primarily upon a combination of trade secret, nondisclosure and other contractual agreements to protect its proprietary rights. The Company generally enters into confidentiality agreements with its employees, consultants, customers and potential customers and limits access to and distribution of its proprietary information. There can be no assurance that the termssteps taken by the Company in this regard will be adequate to deter misappropriation of its proprietary information or that the Company will be able to detect unauthorized use and take appropriate steps to enforce its intellectual property rights.

Our significant stockholders, particularly if they choose to work together, may have the ability to exert significant influence over our business policies and affairs on matters submitted to our stockholders for approval.

Our largest shareholders, Zeff Capital, L.P. and QAR Industries, Inc., are the beneficial owners of an aggregate of 936,658 shares of Common Stock, which represents approximately 47.7% of the Company’s issued and outstanding Common Stock. By virtue of such ownership, Zeff Capital, L.P. and QAR Industries, Inc. have the ability to exercise significant influence over the Company. For example, this concentrated ownership could delay, defer, or prevent a change in control, merger, consolidation, or sale of all or substantially all of the Company’s assets in transactions that other shareholders strongly support or conversely, this concentrated ownership could result in the consummation of such transactions that many of the Company’s other shareholders do not support. Further, investors may be prevented from affecting matters involving the Company, including:

This significant concentration of stock ownership may also adversely affect the trading price for our Common Stock because investors may perceive disadvantages in owning stock in a company that is controlled by a small number of stockholders.

Certain provisions of our governing documents may make it more difficult for a Maintenancethird party to acquire us and make a takeover more difficult to complete, even if such a transaction were in the stockholders’ interest.

In addition to the significant concentration of Confidencethe ownership of our Common Stock, certain provisions of the Company’s charter and Non-Compete Agreement betweenby-laws may have the effect of discouraging a third party from making an acquisition proposal for the Company and Mr. Sharkey dated asmay thereby inhibit a change in control of May 24, 2019. The Maintenancethe Company under circumstances that could give the holders of ConfidenceCommon Stock the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market prices. Such provisions include a classified Board of Directors and Non-Compete Agreement sets forth Mr. Sharkey’s covenants against the disclosureadvance notice requirements for nomination of confidential information, covenants against the solicitation of customers, employeesdirectors and independent contractors and a covenant against competition (all in accordance with the termscertain stockholder proposals set forth therein)in the Company’s charter and supersedes any prior agreements entered into by Mr. Sharkey pertaining to such covenants.by-laws.

The issuance of new classes and series of preferred stock may deter or delay a change in control and/or affect our stock price.

The Sharkey Employment Agreement does not provide forCompany’s charter authorizes the Board of Directors to create new classes and series of preferred stock and to establish the preferences and rights of any payments in connection withsuch classes and series without further action of the stockholders. The issuance of additional classes and series of capital stock may have the effect of delaying, deferring or preventing a change in control of the Company.

Further, the Company’s stock price could be extremely volatile and, as a result, investors may not be able to resell their shares at or above the price they paid for them.

Among the factors that have previously affected the Company’s stock price and may do so in the future are:

The stock market has, and may in the future, experience extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of the Company’s Common Stock.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None

Amended and Restated Employment Agreement with Christopher Hughes

In April 2017, in anticipation of the expiration of Christopher Hughes’ prior employment agreement, the Company entered into a written employment agreement with Mr. Hughes, which was effective as of May 1, 2017 and which was scheduled to terminate on May 31, 2022 (the “Hughes Employment Agreement”). The Hughes Employment Agreement provided for an annual base salary of $350,000 and an annual bonus for fiscal years beginning with the fiscal year ended May 31, 2018 to be approved by the Compensation Committee in its discretion, which may be based upon standards that the Compensation Committee approves at the beginning of each fiscal year commencing with the fiscal year beginning June 1, 2017, and which standards may be modified thereafter with the Compensation Committee’s approval. The Hughes Employment Agreement provided that the Company shall pay any annual bonus that may become payable within 120 days of the end of the applicable fiscal year, for the period to which the bonus relates. In addition, the Hughes Employment Agreement provided that the Company shall pay Mr. Hughes an advance on his annual bonus for the current fiscal year within 30 days after the end of each fiscal quarter (other than the fourth fiscal quarter) in an amount equal to the bonus which would have been earned through the end of such fiscal quarter, based on any standards approved by the Compensation Committee. Each such advance of the bonus was to be approved by the Compensation Committee unless it is paid in accordance with a formula approved in advance for such fiscal year. In the event that following any fiscal quarter or following completion of the Company’s audited financial statements, any advance payment of the bonus previously paid with respect to any fiscal year (or portion thereof) exceeded the amount that Mr. Hughes is entitled to receive through the end of such fiscal quarter or fiscal year, Mr. Hughes was required to promptly return such excess amount to the Company.

On August 9, 2018, the Company and Christopher Hughes entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement, dated and effective as of August 9, 2018 (the “Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement”), that superseded the Hughes Employment Agreement. The Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement has a term of three years, nine months and twenty-two days, and is scheduled to expire on May 31, 2022. The Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement provides for an annual base salary of $400,000, which the Company’s Compensation Committee will review on an annual basis, and which the Company’s Board may increase in the Board’s discretion. Mr. Hughes is eligible to receive an annual cash bonus in the discretion of the Compensation Committee, which may be based upon standards established by the Compensation Committee and approved by the Board. Mr. Hughes is entitled to receive advance payments of the bonus on a quarterly basis based on the amount of the bonus that would have been earned through the end of each quarter according to such standards. Such advance payments of the bonus are subject to recapture by the Company in the event that the amount paid as the advance exceeds the amount that Mr. Hughes was actually entitled to receive. Mr. Hughes is entitled to participate in any pension, profit-sharing, retirement, hospitalization, insurance, medical services or other employee benefit plan generally available to the Company’s executives, to the extent that he is eligible to participate under the terms and conditions of such plans. Mr. Hughes is also entitled to executive medical benefits and a car (leased or owned at the sole discretion of the Company) in such amounts for the car as determined by the Board, provided that the executive medical benefits and car may be discontinued at the end of any fiscal year at the discretion of the Board.Item 2. Properties

The Company has the right to immediately terminate Mr. Hughes’ employmentleases 8,000 square feet of space in Hauppauge, New York for “Cause” (as defined in the Amendeda term expiring December 31, 2023, with annual rents of approximately $94,000. This space is used as executive and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement), in which event Mr. Hughes shall be entitled to receive his base salaryadministrative offices for the monthCompany and the Company’s operating subsidiary. The Company also leases sales and recruiting offices in whichNew York City (lease expires August 2022) and Edison, New Jersey (lease expires May 2027), with aggregate annual rents of approximately $158,000 and $115,000, respectively. The Company entered into an agreement to sublease the termination is effective.New York City office space, resulting in a right-of-use asset impairment charge of $137,000 recorded in fiscal 2021.

The Company hasbelieves the right to terminate Mr. Hughes’ employment upon fifteen days written notice in the event Mr. Hughes is unable to perform his duties on account of illness, accident or other physical or mental incapacitypresent locations are adequate for a period of six consecutive months or an aggregate of 180 days in any period of twelve consecutive months, in which event Mr. Hughes shall be entitled to receive his base salary and reimbursement of approved expensesits current needs as well as for the month in which termination is effective.future expansion of its existing business.

The Company may terminate Mr. Hughes’ employment for any other reason upon thirty days written notice, in which event Mr. Hughes shall be entitled to receive (a) reimbursement of any unpaid approved expenses, (b) severance fromItem 3. Legal Proceedings

Paskowitz Stockholder Litigation

On October 16, 2018, the Company in an amount equal to (i) two times his base salary plus (ii) two times his bonus for the then-current fiscal year, or if that bonus amount cannot be determined, two times the amount of the bonus paid to him in the prior fiscal year, (c) continued group health insurance benefits (including both group health insurance benefits generally offered to all eligible employees of the Company and supplemental executive health insurance benefits) until the earlier of the second anniversary of termination or such time as Mr. Hughes is eligible for comparable coverage under the group health insurance plans of another employer and (d) reimbursement for the monthly cost of his car lease until the second anniversary of the termination of his employment; provided that, as a condition to his right to receive the payments and benefits in clauses (b), (c) and (d), Mr. Hughes executes, delivers and does not revoke a release of all claims against the Company and its affiliates.

The Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement incorporates the terms and provisions of a Maintenance of Confidence and Non-Compete Agreement between the Company and Mr. Hughes dated as of August 9, 2018. The Maintenance of Confidence and Non-Compete Agreement sets forth Mr. Hughes’ covenants against the disclosure of confidential information, covenants against the solicitation of customers, employees and independent contractors and a covenant against competition (all in accordancewas served with the terms set forth therein) and supersedes any prior agreements entered into by Mr. Hughes pertaining to such covenants.

The Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement provides that in the event that Mr. Hughes’ employment is terminated without “cause” during the six-month period prior to, or within one year after, a “change in control” (as defined in the Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement) of the Company, or if Mr. Hughes resigns from his employment for “good reason” within one year after a change in control of the Company, then Mr. Hughes shall be entitled to receive (a) his base salary through the date of termination or resignation plus his bonus pro-rated through such date, (b) an amount equal to two times his base salary plus two times his bonus for the then-current fiscal year, or if such bonus amount cannot be determined, two times the bonus paid to him in the prior fiscal year, provided that Mr. Hughes executes and delivers a release of all claims against the Company, (c) continued group health insurance benefits (including both group health insurance benefits generally offered to all eligible employees of the Company and supplemental executive health insurance benefits) until the earlier of the second anniversary of termination or such time as Mr. Hughes is eligible for comparable coverage under the group health insurance plans of another employer and (d) reimbursement for the monthly cost of his car lease until the second anniversary of the termination of his employment; provided that, as a condition to his right to receive the payments and benefits in clauses (b), (c) and (d), Mr. Hughes executes, delivers and does not revoke a release of all claims against the Company and its affiliates. “Good reason” means either (i) a material breach by the Company of the Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement, (ii) a material diminution in Mr. Hughes’ authority, duties or responsibilities, or (iii) a relocation by the Company of Mr. Hughes’ principal place of business for the performance of his duties to a location that is anywhere outside of a 100 mile radius of the Borough of Manhattan.

The Company terminated Christopher Hughes effective February 29, 2020 for “Cause” as defined in the Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement.  On March 2, 2020, the Company received a letter from Mr. Hughes, providing notice of his intent to resign for “Good Reason” as defined in the Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement pursuant to which he claimed to be entitled to the “Enhanced Severance Amount” under the Amended and Restated Hughes Employment Agreement. Hughes filed a complaint against the Companyfiled on October 11, 2018 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, in March 2020 alleging two causes of action: (1) breach of his employment contract; and (2) breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiff Hughes alleges that he was terminated without cause or in the alternative, that he resigned for good reason and seeks contractual severance pay in the amount of $1,000,000 and reasonable costs and attorney’s fees.  The Company denies his allegations in their entirety and filed counterclaims against him.

Director Compensation

The following table sets forth information concerning the compensation of the non-officer directorsQueens County, by Susan Paskowitz, a stockholder of the Company, who servedagainst the Company; Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes; former directors Christopher Hughes, Raymond A. Roel, Brian J. Mangan, Regina Dowd, James J. Hill, William Kelly, and Eric Stein; as directors duringwell as stockholders Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC (the “Stockholder Litigation”). The complaint purported to be a class action lawsuit asserting claims on behalf of all minority stockholders of the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020.Company. Ms. Paskowitz alleged the following: the sale by Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes of an aggregate of 819,491 shares of the Company’s common stock (“controlling interest”) to Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC was in breach of Joseph F. Hughes’ and Winifred M. Hughes’ fiduciary duties and to the detriment of the Company’s minority stockholders; the former members of the Board of Directors of the Company whonamed in the complaint breached their fiduciary duties by failing to immediately adopt a rights plan that would have prevented Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes from selling their shares and preserved a higher premium for all stockholders; Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC are “partners” and constitute a “group.” Ms. Paskowitz also serve as executive officersasserted that Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC aided and abetted Joseph F. Hughes’ and Winifred M. Hughes’ conduct, and ultimately sought to buy out the remaining shares of the Company are not paid any compensation for their service as directors. For the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020, Christopher Hughes was the only director of the Company who also served asat an executive officer. He resigned as Chairman and member of the Board on December 30, 2019.unfair price.

For their service,On June 14, 2019, Ms. Paskowitz filed an amended complaint in the Stockholder Litigation with the court against the former members of the Board who are not officersof Directors and Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC, which asserted substantially similar allegations to those contained in the October 11, 2018 complaint, but omitted Regina Dowd, Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes as defendants. In addition to the former members of the Board of Directors named in the original complaint, the amended complaint named former directors Ira Cohen, Joseph Pennacchio, and William Kelly as defendants. The amended complaint also asserted a derivative claim purportedly on behalf of the Company received a pro-rated amount of an annual retainer of $10,000, payable quarterly, based on period of time they respectively served during fiscal 2020.

Bradley M. Tirpak received a pro-rated amount of an additional annual retainer of $10,000 for his service as Chairmanagainst the named former members of the Board during fiscal 2020 startingof Directors. The amended complaint sought declaratory judgment and unspecified monetary damages. The complaint requested: (1) a declaration from December 30,the court that the former members of the Board of Directors named in the complaint breached their fiduciary duties by failing to timely adopt a stockholder rights plan, which resulted in the loss of the ability to auction the Company off to the highest bidder without interference from Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC; (2) damages derivatively on behalf of the Company for unspecified harm caused by the named Directors’ alleged breaches of fiduciary duties; (3) damages and equitable relief derivatively on behalf of the Company for the named Directors’ alleged failure to adopt proper corporate governance practices; and (4) damages and injunctive relief against Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC based on their knowing dissemination of false or misleading public statements concerning their status as a group. The complaint did not assign any monetary values to alleged damages.

On July 15, 2019, the Company filed an answer to the amended complaint in the Stockholder Litigation and cross-claims against Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC for breaches of their fiduciary duties, aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties, and indemnification and contribution based on their misappropriation of material nonpublic information and their failure to disclose complete and accurate information in SEC filings concerning their group actions to attempt a creeping takeover of the Company, which was thereafter amended on July 26, 2019.

H. Timothy Eriksen received a pro-rated amount of an additional annual retainer of $10,000 for his service as Chairman of the Audit Committee during fiscal 2020 starting from December 30, 2019. Mr. Eriksen did not receive any additional retainer for his service as Chairman of the Nominating Committee of the Board or lead independent director during fiscal 2020 starting from December 30, 2019.

Robert Fitzgerald received a pro-rated amount of an additional annual retainer of $10,000 for his service as Chairman of the Compensation Committee during fiscal 2020 starting from December 30, 2019. Mr. Fitzgerald did not receive any additional retainer for his service as Chairman of the Special Committee of the Board during fiscal 2020 starting from December 30, 2019.

Raymond A. Roel received $5,000 for his director service and $2,500 for his service as Chairman of the Compensation Committee during fiscal 2020 ended on October 22, 2019.

Ira D. Cohen received $5,000 for his director service and did not receive any additional fee for his service as Chairman of the Special Committee during fiscal 2020 ended on October 22, 2019.

Brian J. Mangan received $5,000 for his director service, $5,000 for his service as Chairman of the Audit Committee during fiscal 2020 ended on December 30, 2019 and $1,875 for his service as Chairman of the Special Committee during fiscal 2020 from October 22, 2019 to December 30, 2019.

Each of Eric M. Stein and William J. Kelly received $5,000 for their respective director service and $1,875 for their respective service as member of the Special Committee during fiscal 2020 ended on December 30, 2019.

Joseph Pennacchio received $5,000 for his director service during fiscal 2020 ended on December 30, 2019.

Principal StockholdersOn December 21, 2018, the Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc., Robert Fitzgerald, Fintech Consulting LLC, and Security OwnershipTajuddin Haslani for violations of Management

The outstanding voting stockthe disclosure and anti-fraud requirements of the federal securities laws under Sections 13(d) and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and the related rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC, for failing to disclose to the Company and its stockholders their formation of a group and the group’s intention to seize control of the Company as(the “SDNY Action”). The complaint requested that the court, among other things, declare that the defendants have solicited proxies without filing timely, accurate and complete reports on Schedule 13D and Schedule 14A in violation of September 25, 2020 consisted of 1,962,062 shares of Common Stock. The table below sets forth the beneficial ownershipSections 13(d) and 14(a) of the Common StockExchange Act, direct the defendants to file with the SEC complete and accurate disclosures, enjoin the defendants from voting any of their shares prior to such time as complete and accurate disclosures have been filed, and enjoin the defendants from further violations of the Exchange Act with respect to the securities of the Company.

On January 7, 2019, Ms. Paskowitz filed a related action against Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc., Robert Fitzgerald, Fintech Consulting LLC, and Tajuddin Haslani in the Southern District of New York, which asserted claims against them for breach of fiduciary duty and under federal securities laws similar to those asserted in the Company’s action. Although the Company is not a party to Ms. Paskowitz’s action, the court determined to treat the Company’s and Ms. Paskowitz’s respective actions as related.

On August 7, 2019, following the Company’s initial rescheduling of the 2018 Annual Meeting for September 13, 2019 and the filing of Preliminary Proxy Statements by the Company and Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Capital, L.P. filed a complaint in the Delaware Court of Chancery against the Company seeking an order requiring the Company to hold its next annual meeting of stockholders on or around September 13, 2019, and obligating the Company to elect Class I and Class III directors at that annual meeting. 

On August 13, 2019, the Company filed a motion for preliminary injunction in the SDNY Action in advance of the Company’s directors, executive officers2018 Annual Meeting originally scheduled for September 13, 2019 and persons knownrequested leave to the Company to be the beneficial owner of more than five percent (5%) of the outstanding shares of Common Stock as of September 25, 2020:

Related Party Transactions

file a motion for expedited discovery. The Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing and approving all transactions between the Company and any related party pursuant to the Audit Committee’s charter. Except as described below, the Company was not a participant in any transaction since the beginning of the 2019 fiscal year in which any related person had a direct or indirect material interest and in which the amount involved exceeded the lesser of $120,000 or 1% of the average ofCourt denied the Company’s total assets atmotion for preliminary injunction but ordered Zeff to “make clear that the endsecond set of each ofdirectors” described by Zeff in its preliminary proxy statement “is contingent upon the Company’s two prior fiscal years, and no such transactions are currently proposed.

Regina Dowd, who served as a director of the Company during fiscal 2019 until her resignation as a director on August 27, 2018, was also employed as a sales executive of the Company for which she was paid compensation in the amount of $149,000 for the 2019 fiscal year. The Company and Ms. Dowd entered into an employment agreement dated as of July 1, 2019, pursuant to which the Company employs Ms. Dowd as an Account Manager for a three-year term expiring on June 30, 2022, and on an at-will basis thereafter, for an annual base salary of $60,000 and eligibility to earn commissions pursuant to an incentive compensation/commission plan.

In connection with the settlementresolution of a civil action brought against the Companyproceeding in June 2019 by Ms. Dowd and Joseph F. Hughes, the former Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Company, concerning their right to indemnification by the Company for legal fees incurred by them in connection with certain lawsuits previously disclosed by the Company in its reports filed with the SEC that affect the Company, Ms. Dowd (in her capacity as a former director of the Company) and Mr. Joseph Hughes (in his capacity as the former Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company), the Company agreed to pay approximately $385,000 in legal fees incurred by them.Delaware Chancery Court.”

On August 30, 2019, the Company entered into the Settlement Agreementa settlement and release agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with certain investors including Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, and Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc. and, Robert Fitzgerald, and Fintech Consulting LLC and Tajuddin Haslani (collectively, the “Investor Parties”), each of whom has been a beneficial owner of more than five percent (5%) of the outstanding shares of Common Stock, with respect to the proxy contest pertaining to the election of directors at the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders,Annual Meeting, which was held on October 22, 2019. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed to forever settle and resolve any and all disputes between the parties, including without limitation disputes arising out of or relating to the following litigations:

(i) The complaint relating to alleged breaches of fiduciary duties filed on November 1, 2018 by Fintech Consulting LLC against the Company in the Delaware Court of Chancery, which was previously dismissed voluntarily;

(ii) The complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of the federal securities laws filed on December 21, 2018 by the Company against the Investor Parties in the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York;

(iii) Cross-claims relating to alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and for indemnification and contribution filed on July 26, 2019 by the Company against the Investor Parties in New York Supreme Court, Queens County; and

(iv) The complaint to compel annual meeting of stockholders filed on August 7, 2019 by Zeff Capital, L.P. against the Company in the Delaware Court of Chancery.

No party admitted any liability by entering into the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement did not resolve the Stockholder Litigation filed by Susan Paskowitz against the Company, Joseph F. Hughes, Winifred M. Hughes and certain former directors of the Company in the Supreme Court of the State of New York on October 11, 2018.

Concurrently with the Settlement Agreement, the parties entered into a share repurchase agreement (the “Repurchase Agreement”) which provided for the purchase by the Company and Christopher Hughes, the Company’s former President and Chief Executive Officer, of the shares of the Company’s Common Stock held by the Investor Parties (the “Repurchase”). The Settlement Agreement also contemplated that, if the Repurchase was completed, the Company would make a settlement payment to the Investor Parties at the closing of the Repurchase in an amount of approximately $1,500,000 (the “Settlement Payment”). However, the Repurchase and Settlement Payment were not completed by the deadline of December 30, 2019.

Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, (1) the Company agreed to adopt an amendment to the Company’s Amended and Restated By-Laws, dated April 9, 2015 (the “By-Laws Amendment”), providing that stockholders of the Company owning at least forty percent (40%) of the issued and outstanding Common Stock may request a special meeting of stockholders; (2) the Investor Parties agreed not to take any action to call or otherwise cause a special meeting of stockholders to occur prior to December 30, 2019 (unless the Company had failed to hold the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders)Annual Meeting); (3) the Company agreed to amend and restate the Company’s Rights Agreement, dated August 29, 2018 (the “Amended Rights Agreement”), to confirm that a Distribution Date (as defined in the Amended Rights Agreement) shall not occur as a result of any request by any of the Investor Parties for a special meeting; (4) the Company agreed that prior to the earlier of (A) the completion of the Repurchase and the payment of the Settlement Payment and (B) January 1, 2020, the Board of Directors shall not consist of more than seven (7) directors.

Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the two nominees for director made by Zeff Capital, L.P., Bradley M. Tirpak and H. Timothy Eriksen, were nominated and subsequently elected as directors at the Company’s 2018 annual meeting of stockholdersAnnual Meeting held on October 22, 2019. Please see the Company’s current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 21, 2019 for more information about the background of the election of directors at the Company’s 2018 Annual Meeting.

Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, inasmuch as the Repurchase was not completed and the Settlement Payment was not made by December 30, 2019, the members of the Board of Directors (other than the two directors who were nominated by Zeff Capital, L.P. and elected as directors at the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders)Annual Meeting) resigned from the Board effective 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 30, 2019. Immediately thereafter, the two remaining directors appointed Robert Fitzgerald to the Board of Directors. Please see the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 31, 2019 for more information about the background and the appointment of Robert Fitzgerald.

In addition, the Settlement Agreement provides for mutual releases between the Company and each of the Investor Parties and certain of their affiliates. Each of the Investor Parties and certain of their affiliates also agreed to certain customary standstill provisions, including without limitation, with regard to certain actions in connection with the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders,Annual Meeting, Extraordinary Transactions (as defined in the Settlement Agreement) with the Company, and the acquisition of any securities (or beneficial ownership thereof) of the Company, each of which expired on December 30, 2019.

The foregoing is not a complete description of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and the Repurchase Agreement. For a further description of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and the Repurchase Agreement, including copies of the Settlement Agreement and Repurchase Agreement, please see the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed by the Company with the SEC on September 3, 2019.

On October 21, 2019, the Company entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (the “MOU”) with Susan Paskowitz providing for the settlement of the Stockholder Litigation filed by Ms. Paskowitz on October 11, 2018. The MOU provides for the settlement of the claims by Ms. Paskowitz that (1) the former members of the Board named in the original complaint allegedly breached their fiduciary duties by failing to immediately adopt a rights plan that would have prevented the sale by Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes of an aggregate of 819,491 shares of the Company’s common stock to the Investor Parties; (2) the former members of the Board named in the amended complaint allegedly breached their fiduciary duties and failed to adopt proper corporate governance practices; and (3) the Investor Parties acted as “partners” and constituted a “group” in their purchase of shares from Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes and knowingly disseminated false or misleading public statements concerning their status as a group.

Pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the Company will (1) implement certain corporate governance reforms described in the MOU within 30 days of a final order and judgment entered by the court, and keep these corporate governance reforms in place for 5 years from the time of the final order and judgment; and (2) acknowledge that the plaintiff, Ms. Paskowitz, and her counsel provided a substantial benefit to the Company and its stockholders through the prosecution of the Stockholder Litigation and other related actions filed by Ms. Paskowitz described above.

On December 16, 2019, the Company entered into a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement (the “Stipulation”) with Susan Paskowitz in the Stockholder Litigation, which retained the terms and conditions of settlement of the Stockholder Litigation contained in the MOU described in the preceding paragraph, with the addition that the Company will pay to plaintiff’s counsel an award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses in the amount of $260,000 (collectively, the “Stockholder Litigation Settlement”). The Stockholder Litigation Settlement does not contain any admission of liability, wrongdoing or responsibility by any of the parties, and provides for mutual releases by all parties. Each stockholder of the Company is a member of the plaintiff class unless such stockholder opts out of the class. The Stipulation is independent of the Settlement Agreement and Repurchase Agreement that the Company had entered into with the Investor Parties.

On December 24, 2019, Ms. Paskowitz moved for preliminary approval of the Stipulation. On May 21, 2020, the Court entered an order preliminarily approving the Stipulation. The Court conducted a settlement hearing on April 20, 2021 to consider final approval of the Stipulation. On May 25, 2021, the Court issued a final order and judgment approving all material terms in the Stipulation. Pursuant to the terms of the final order, the Court fully and finally approved the settlement set forth in the Stipulation and dismissed the Stockholder Litigation with prejudice. The settlement payment was paid by the Company’s insurance provider under its insurance policy.

Dispute with Former CEO

The Company terminated Christopher Hughes, the former Chief Executive Officer of the Company (“Hughes”), effective February 29, 2020 for “Cause” as defined in Section 6(a) of his Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated August 9, 2018 (the “Employment Agreement”). Despite having already been terminated from employment, on March 2, 2020, the Company received a letter from Mr. Hughes, providing notice of his intent to resign for “Good Reason” as defined in Section 7(c) of the Employment Agreement pursuant to which he claimed to be entitled to the “Enhanced Severance Amount” under the Employment Agreement. Hughes filed a complaint against the Company in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in March 2020 alleging two causes of action: (1) breach of his employment contract; and (2) breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiff Hughes alleges that he was terminated without cause or in the alternative that he resigned for good reason and therefore, pursuant to the Employment Agreement, Hughes seeks severance pay in the amount of $1,000,000 and reasonable costs and attorney’s fees. The Company denies Plaintiff’s allegations in their entirety and has filed counterclaims against Plaintiff for (1) declaratory relief; (2) breach of confidence/non-compete agreement; (3) declaratory and injunctive relief – confidence/non-compete; (4) tortious interference with current and prospective contractual and economic relations; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) misappropriation of trade secrets; (7) declaratory and injunctive relief – unfair competition; and (8) conversion. The Company intends to vigorously defend and litigate against this matter while recognizing the costs of litigation, including that it may divert the attention of management and key personnel from business operations.

At this time, it is not possible to predict the outcome of any of these litigation matters, to the extent they are ongoing, or their effect on the Company and the Company’s consolidated financial position.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

The Company’s shares of Common Stock trade on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol TSRI. The following are the high and low sales prices for each quarter during the fiscal years ended May 31, 2021 and 2020:

There were 46 holders of record of the Company’s Common Stock as of July 31, 2021. Additionally, the Company estimates that there were approximately 700 beneficial holders as of that date. The Company has no current plans to implement a quarterly dividend program or pay any other special cash dividend.

There only securities authorized for issuance under any equity compensation plan relate to the 2020 Equity Incentive Plan. See Note 15 to the consolidated financial statements, contained elsewhere in this report.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data

Not applicable.

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

The following discussion and analysis should be read in conjunction with the Company’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto presented elsewhere in this report.

Results of Operations

The following table sets forth for the periods indicated certain financial information derived from the Company’s consolidated statements of operations. There can be no assurance that historical trends in operating results will continue in the future:

Revenue

Revenue consists primarily of revenue from computer programming consulting services. Revenue for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 increased approximately $9,700,000 or 16.4% from the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020, primarily due to new business development and the acquisition of Geneva. Excluding the added business activity of $8,805,000 from the Geneva client base, revenue would have increased $895,000 or 1.5%. The average number of consultants on billing with customers increased from 416 for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 to 479 for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021. There were 308 and 335 IT contractors at May 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively; while there were 108 and 144 clerical and administrative contractors at May 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively.

We experienced terminated assignments and a decrease in demand for new assignments during fiscal 2021 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, which led to the lower number of consultant placements during the year and negatively impacted the Company’s revenues. Additionally, the COVID-19 pandemic has created operational challenges. The start of certain new assignments has been and continues to be delayed due to delays in obtaining necessary clearances, as many of the agencies required to be contacted in obtaining the information needed for background checks have been fully or partially closed. By the end of the first quarter of fiscal 2021, the Company had used 100% of the $6,659,000 proceeds from the PPP Loan (as defined in Note 10 to the Consolidated Financial Statements elsewhere in this report) it received in April 2020 to fund its payroll and other allowable expenses, which was fully forgiven in July 2021. The use of these proceeds allowed the Company to avoid certain salary reductions, furloughs and layoffs of employees during the covered period.

Cost of Sales

Cost of sales for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 increased approximately $7,557,000 or 15.1% to $57,500,000 from $49,943,000 in the prior year period. The increase in cost of sales resulted primarily from an increase in consultants placed with customers, primarily from the new business development activity within the existing Geneva client base. Cost of sales as a percentage of revenue decreased from 84.5% in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 to 83.6% in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021. The percentage increase in cost of sales for the fiscal 2021 as compared to fiscal 2020 (15.1% increase) was lower than the percentage increase in revenue for fiscal 2021 as compared to fiscal 2020 (16.4% increase), causing an increase in gross margins.

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses

Selling, general and administrative expenses consist primarily of expenses relating to account executives, technical recruiters, facilities costs, management and corporate overhead. These expenses increased approximately $880,000 or 8.1% from $10,929,000 in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 to $11,809,000 in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021. The increase in these expenses primarily resulted from an additional $1,721,000 in selling, general and administrative expenses from the newly acquired Geneva operation offset by a decrease of $868,000 in amounts paid for legal and advisory services from the prior year related to the Stockholder Litigation and costs surrounding the prior year proxy and annual meeting. Additionally, the Company incurred non-cash compensation expenses of $236,000 in fiscal 2021 related to the TSR, Inc. 2020 Equity Incentive Plan and also recorded an asset impairment charge of $137,000 in fiscal 2021 due to the signing of a subletting agreement for one of its offices. Selling, general and administrative expenses, as a percentage of revenue, decreased from 18.5% in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 to 17.1% in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021.

Other Expense

Other expense for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 resulted primarily from net interest expense of approximately $193,000 and a mark to market loss of approximately $5,000 on the Company’s marketable equity securities. Other expense for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 resulted primarily from net interest expense of $75,000 and a mark to market gain of approximately $15,000 on the Company’s marketable equity securities.

Income Taxes

The effective income tax rates were a benefit of 15.9% for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 and a benefit of 39.3% for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020. In the prior fiscal year, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) allowed net operating losses to be carried back five years. The Company applied for refunds of approximately $586,000 based on the fiscal 2019 loss. The deferred tax asset provided from the loss in fiscal 2019 was originally recorded at the lower federal rate of 21%. It was used in fiscal 2020 at the higher federal rate of 34% used prior to 2018, resulting in an additional benefit in excess of $200,000. The rates for both years consist of the new federal corporate tax rate of 21.0% effective January 1, 2018. The benefit of the deferred tax asset will be limited to 21% for federal income tax purposes in fiscal years going forward.

Net Loss Attributable to TSR

Net loss attributable to TSR was approximately $601,000 in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 compared to a loss of $1,126,000 in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020. The decrease in the net loss was primarily attributable to the increase in revenue and gross profit from the Geneva acquisition and a decrease in legal and advisory fees.

Impact of Inflation and Changing Prices

For the fiscal years ended May 31, 2021 and 2020, inflation and changing prices did not have a material effect on the Company’s revenue or income from continuing operations.

Liquidity, Capital Resources and Changes in Financial Condition

The Company’s cash was sufficient to enable it to meet its liquidity requirements during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021. The Company expects that its cash and cash equivalents and the Company’s revolving credit facility (the “Credit Facility”) pursuant to a Loan and Security Agreement with Access Capital, Inc. (the “Lender”)will be sufficient to provide the Company with adequate resources to meet its liquidity requirements for the 12 month period following the issuance of these financial statements. Utilizing its accounts receivable as collateral, the Company has secured the Credit Facility to increase its liquidity as necessary. As of May 31, 2021, the net borrowings outstanding against this Credit Facility were approximately $93,000. The amount the Company has borrowed fluctuates and, at times, it has utilized the maximum amount of $2,000,000 available under this facility in the prior fiscal year to fund its payroll and other obligations. The Company was in compliance with all covenants under the Credit Facility as of May 31, 2021 and through the date of this filing. Additionally, in April 2020, the Company secured a PPP Loan in the amount of $6,659,000 to meet its obligations in the face of potential disruptions in its business operations and the potential inability of its customers to pay their accounts when due. As of August 31, 2020, the Company had used 100% of the PPP Loan funds to fund its payroll and for other allowable expenses under the PPP Loan. The use of these funds allowed the Company to avoid certain salary reductions, furloughs and layoffs of employees during the period. The Company applied for PPP Loan forgiveness and subsequent to the end of the reporting period, the application for forgiveness was accepted and approved; the PPP Loan was fully forgiven in July 2021.

At May 31, 2021, the Company had working capital (total current assets in excess of total current liabilities) of approximately $8,898,000 including cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities of $7,416,000 as compared to working capital of $12,239,000 including cash and cash equivalents and marketable securities of $9,780,000 at May 31, 2020.

Net cash flow of approximately $1,304,000 was provided by operations during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 as compared to $1,567,000 of net cash flow used in operations in the prior year. The cash provided by operations for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 primarily resulted from an increase in accounts payable and other payables and accrued expenses of $2,798,000 and a decrease in prepaid and recoverable income taxes of $590,000 offset by the consolidated net loss of $577,000 and an increase in accounts receivable of $1,824,000. The increase in accounts payable and accrued expenses primarily resulted from the deferral of $1,269,000 in payroll taxes as allowed by the CARES Act. One half of these deferred payroll taxes are due December 31, 2021 and the second half on December 31, 2022. The cash used in operations for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 primarily resulted from the consolidated net loss of $1,098,000, a decrease in accounts payable and accrued expenses of $892,000 and an increase in prepaid and recoverable income taxes of $547,000, which were offset, to an extent, by a decrease in accounts receivable of $386,000 and the accrual of $828,000 for a legal settlement.

Net cash used in investing activities of approximately $3,226,000 for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 primarily resulted from the acquisition of Geneva in the amount of $3,100,000 and purchases of fixed assets of $126,000. Net cash provided by investing activities of $471,000 for the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 primarily resulted from not reinvesting the proceeds of matured certificates of deposit of $492,000 offset, to an extent, by purchases of fixed assets of $21,000.

Net cash used in financing activities of approximately $437,000 during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 resulted from net payments on the Company’s Credit Facility of $409,000 and distributions to the minority interest of $28,000. Net cash provided by financing activities during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 of $7,132,000 primarily resulted from proceeds from the PPP Loan of $6,659,220 and net drawings under the Company’s Credit Facility of $501,000.

The Company’s capital resource commitments at May 31, 2021 consisted of lease obligations on its branch and corporate facilities and an accrued legal settlement payable. The net present value of its future lease and settlement payments were approximately $1,017,000 and $867,000, respectively, as of May 31, 2021. The Company intends to finance these commitments primarily from the Company’s available cash and Credit Facility.

Impact of New Accounting Standards

Effective June 1, 2019, the Company adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-02, Leases, which sets out the principle for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases for both parties to a contract (i.e., lessees and lessors). The new standard requires lessees to classify leases as either finance or operating leases and record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than 12 months regardless of their classification. An accounting policy election may be made to account for leases with a term of 12 months or less similar to existing guidance for operating leases today. ASU No. 2016-02 supersedes the existing guidance on accounting for leases. In July 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU No. 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements, which allows for an optional transition method for the adoption of Topic 842. The two permitted transition methods are now the modified retrospective approach, which applies the new lease requirements at the beginning of the earliest period presented, and the optional transition method, which applies the new lease requirements through a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. ASU 2016-02 is effective for our fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 and the interim periods within that year. The Company adopted this standard in the first quarter of fiscal 2020 using the optional transition method. The Company also elected the practical expedients that allow us to carry forward the historical lease classification. The Company has established an inventory of existing leases and implemented a new process of evaluating the classification of each lease. The financial impact of the adoption of the new standard at June 1, 2019 increased total assets and total liabilities by approximately $690,000. The financial impact of the adoption primarily relates to the capitalization of right-of-use assets and recognition of lease liabilities related to operating leases.

Critical Accounting Policies

The SEC defines “critical accounting policies” as those that require the application of management’s most difficult, subjective or complex judgments, often as a result of the need to make estimates about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain and may change in subsequent periods.

The Company’s significant accounting policies are described in Note 1 to its consolidated financial statements, contained elsewhere in this report. The Company believes that the following accounting policies require the application of management’s most difficult, subjective or complex judgments:

Revenue Recognition

Revenues are recognized as control of the promised service is transferred to customers, in an amount that reflects the consideration expected in exchange for the services. Revenues from contract assignments are recognized over time, based on hours worked by the Company’s contract professionals. The performance of the requested service over time is the single performance obligation for assignment revenues. Certain customers may receive discounts (e.g., volume discounts, rebates, prompt-pay discounts) and adjustments to the amounts billed. These discounts, rebates and adjustments are considered variable consideration. Volume discounts are the largest component of variable consideration and are estimated using the most likely amount method prescribed by Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 606, contracts terms and estimates of revenue. Revenues are recognized net of variable consideration to the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal of revenues will not occur in subsequent periods. Payment terms vary and the time between invoicing and when payment is due is not significant. There are no financing components to the Company’s arrangements. There are no incremental costs to obtain contracts and costs to fulfill contracts are expensed as incurred. The Company’s operations are primarily located in the United States. The Company recognizes most of its revenue on a gross basis when it acts as a principal in its transactions. The Company has direct contractual relationships with its customers, bears the risks and rewards of its arrangements, and has the discretion to select the contract professionals and establish the price for the services to be provided. Additionally, the Company retains control over its contract professionals based on its contractual arrangements. The Company primarily provides services through its employees and to a lesser extent, through subcontractors; the related costs are included in cost of sales. The Company includes billable expenses (out-of-pocket reimbursable expenses) in revenue and the associated expenses are included in cost of sales.

Valuation of Deferred Tax Assets

We regularly evaluate our ability to recover the reported amount of our deferred income tax assets considering several factors, including our estimate of the likelihood of the Company generating sufficient taxable income in future years during the period over which temporary differences reverse. Presently, the Company believes that it is more likely than not that it will realize the benefits of its deferred tax assets based primarily on the Company’s history of and projections for taxable income in the future. In the event that actual results differ from our estimates or we adjust these estimates in future periods, we may need to establish a valuation allowance against a portion or all of our deferred tax assets, which could materially impact our financial position or results of operations.

Goodwill

Goodwill is recorded when the purchase price paid for an acquisition exceeds the estimated fair value of the net identified tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized but is subject to impairment analysis at least once annually or more frequently upon the occurrence of an event or when circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a unit is greater than its fair value.

Intangible Assets

The Company amortizes its intangible assets over their estimated useful lives and will review these assets for impairment when there is evidence that events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of these assets is measured by comparing the carrying amounts to the future undiscounted cash flows the assets are expected to generate. If intangible assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to be recognized equals the amount by which the carrying value of the asset exceeds its fair market value.

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

The Company is a smaller reporting company and is therefore not required to provide this information.

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

Index to Consolidated Financial Statements

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

Board of Directors and Shareholders

TSR, Inc.

Opinion on the Financial Statements

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of TSR, Inc. (the “Company”) as of May 31, 2021 and 2020, and the related consolidated statements of operations, equity and cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended May 31, 2021, and the related notes (collectively referred to as the “consolidated financial statements”). In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of May 31, 2021 and 2020, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the years in the two-year period ended May 31, 2021 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Basis for Opinion

These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the Company’s consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. As part of our audits, we are required to obtain an understanding of internal control over financial report, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion.

Our audits included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the consolidated financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the consolidated financial statements. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Critical Audit Matter

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the consolidated financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that: (i) related to accounts or disclosures that are material to the consolidated financial statements and (ii) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of a critical audit matter does not alter in any way our opinion on the consolidated financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which they relate.

Business Combination

As described in Note 11 to the consolidated financial statements, the Company completed the acquisition of Geneva Consulting Group, Inc. (“Geneva”) during the year ended May 31, 2021. The acquisition was accounted for as a business combination using the acquisition method of accounting.

We identified the Company’s accounting for the Geneva acquisition as a critical audit matter. Auditing the Company’s business combination was complex and subjective due to the significant estimation and judgment in determining the fair values assigned to the acquired assets, including identifiable intangible assets, and assumed liabilities as well as a liability for contingent consideration related to an earn-out payable upon the achievement of projected results. Specifically, the forecasted cash flows are sensitive to significant assumptions such as discount rates, projected annual revenue growth rates, projected long-term growth rates and residual or terminal values, all of which are affected by expected future market or economic conditions, including the effects of the global pandemic. In addition, our audit effort involved the use of a professional within our firm with specialized skill and knowledge in valuation methods and models.

The primary procedures we performed to address this critical audit matter included the following:

/s/ CohnReznick LLP

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 2008.

Jericho, New York 

August 23, 2021 

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

May 31, 2021 and 2020

ASSETS

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

May 31, 2021 and 2020

LIABILITIES AND EQUITY

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

Years Ended May 31, 2021 and 2020

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EQUITY

Years Ended May 31, 2021 and 2020

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

Years Ended May 31, 2021 and 2020

See accompanying notes to consolidated financial statements.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

May 31, 2021 and 2020

TSR, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company,” “TSR,” “we,” “us” and “our”) are primarily engaged in providing contract computer programming services to commercial customers located primarily in the Metropolitan New York area. The Company provides its customers with technical computer personnel to supplement their in-house information technology (“IT”) capabilities. In addition, beginning in fiscal 2017, the Company has provided and continues to provide administrative (non-IT) workers on a contract basis to some of its significant customers, including new customers acquired following the Geneva acquisition. In fiscal 2021, three customers each accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s consolidated revenue, constituting a combined 54.3%. The largest of these constituted 22.4% of consolidated revenue. In fiscal 2020, three customers each accounted for more than 10% of the Company’s consolidated revenue, constituting a combined 53.3%. The largest of these constituted 21.2% of consolidated revenue. The accounts receivable balances associated with the Company’s largest customers were $4,585,000 for three customers at May 31, 2021 and $3,747,000 for three customers at May 31, 2020. The Company operates in one business segment, contract staffing services.

The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of TSR and its subsidiaries. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

Revenues are recognized as control of the promised service is transferred to customers, in an amount that reflects the consideration expected in exchange for the services. Revenues from contract assignments are recognized over time, based on hours worked by the Company’s contract professionals. The performance of the requested service over time is the single performance obligation for assignment revenues. Certain customers may receive discounts (e.g., volume discounts, rebates, prompt-pay discounts) and adjustments to the amounts billed. These discounts, rebates and adjustments are considered variable consideration. Volume discounts are the largest component of variable consideration and are estimated using the most likely amount method prescribed by Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 606, contracts terms and estimates of revenue. Revenues are recognized net of variable consideration to the extent that it is probable that a significant reversal of revenues will not occur in subsequent periods. Payment terms vary and the time between invoicing and when payment is due is not significant. There are no financing components to the Company’s arrangements. There are no incremental costs to obtain contracts and costs to fulfill contracts are expensed as incurred. The Company’s operations are primarily located in the United States.

The Company recognizes most of its revenue on a gross basis when it acts as a principal in its transactions. The Company has direct contractual relationships with its customers, bears the risks and rewards of its arrangements, and has the discretion to select the contract professionals and establish the price for the services to be provided. Additionally, the Company retains control over its contract professionals based on its contractual arrangements. The Company primarily provides services through its employees and to a lesser extent, through subcontractors; the related costs are included in cost of sales. The Company includes billable expenses (out-of-pocket reimbursable expenses) in revenue and the associated expenses are included in cost of sales.

The Company considers short-term highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less at the time of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents were comprised of the following as of May 31, 2021 and 2020:

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

The Company has characterized its investments in marketable securities, based on the priority of the inputs used to value the investments, into a three-level fair value hierarchy. The fair value hierarchy gives the highest priority to quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1), and lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3). If the inputs used to measure the investments fall within different levels of the hierarchy, the categorization is based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement of the instrument.

Investments recorded in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets are categorized based on the inputs to valuation techniques as follows:

Level 1- These are investments where values are based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in an active market the Company has the ability to access.

Level 2- These are investments where values are based on quoted market prices that are not active or model derived valuations in which all significant inputs are observable in active markets.

Level 3- These are investments where values are derived from techniques in which one or more significant inputs are unobservable.

The following are the major categories of assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of May 31, 2021 and 2020 using quoted prices in active markets for identical assets (Level 1), significant other observable inputs (Level 2), and significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):

The Company’s equity securities are classified as trading securities, which are carried at fair value, as determined by quoted market prices, which is a Level 1 input, as established by the fair value hierarchy. The related unrealized gains and losses are included in earnings. The Company’s marketable securities at May 31, 2021 and 2020 are summarized as follows:

The Company’s investments in marketable securities consist primarily of investments in equity securities. Market values were determined for each individual security in the investment portfolio. When evaluating the investments for other-than-temporary impairment, the Company reviews factors such as length of time and extent to which fair value has been below cost basis, the financial condition of the issuer, and the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investment for a period of time, which may be sufficient for anticipated recovery in market values.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

The carrying amount of accounts receivable is reduced by a valuation allowance that reflects management’s best estimate of the amounts that will not be collected. In addition to reviewing delinquent accounts receivable, management considers many factors in estimating its general allowance, including historical data, experience, customer types, creditworthiness and economic trends. From time to time, management may adjust its assumptions for anticipated changes in any of those or other factors expected to affect collectability.

Depreciation and amortization of equipment and leasehold improvements has been computed using the straight-line method over the following useful lives:

Basic net loss per common share is computed by dividing net loss available to common stockholders of TSR by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding during the reporting period, excluding the effects of any potentially dilutive securities. During the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021, the Company granted time and performance vesting stock awards under its 2020 Equity Incentive Plan (see Note 15 for further information). Diluted earnings per share gives effect to all potentially dilutive common shares outstanding during the reporting period. The common stock equivalents associated with these stock awards of 78,901 in the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021 have not been included for dilutive shares outstanding for the fiscal year May 31, 2021 since the effect would be anti-dilutive due to the net loss incurred for the period. The Company had no stock options or other potentially dilutive securities outstanding during the fiscal year ended May 31, 2020.

Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of the Company’s assets and liabilities at enacted rates expected to be in effect when such amounts are realized or settled. The effect of enacted tax law or rate changes is reflected in income in the period of enactment.

ASC 820-10, Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures (“ASC 820-10”), defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value under accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and provides for expanded disclosure about fair value measurements. ASC 820-10 applies to all other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements.

The Company determines or calculates the fair value of financial instruments using quoted market prices in active markets when such information is available or using appropriate present value or other valuation techniques, such as discounted cash flow analyses, incorporating available market discount rate information for similar types of instruments while estimating for non-performance and liquidity risk. These techniques are significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rate, credit spreads and estimates of future cash flows.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

Assets and liabilities typically recorded at fair value on a non-recurring basis to which ASC 820-10 applies include:

This topic defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date and establishes a three-level hierarchy, which encourages an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. ASC 820-10 requires that assets and liabilities recorded at fair value be classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:

In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, the Company classifies such financial assets or liabilities based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment and considers factors specific to the asset or liability.

ASC Topic 825, Financial Instruments, requires disclosure of the fair value of certain financial instruments. For cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts and other payables, accrued liabilities and advances from customers, the amounts presented in the consolidated financial statements approximate fair value because of the short-term maturities of these instruments.

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Such estimates include, but are not limited to, provisions for doubtful accounts receivable and assessments of the recoverability of the Company’s deferred tax assets. Actual results could differ from those estimates.

The Company reviews its long-lived assets for possible impairment whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If the sum of the expected cash flows undiscounted and without interest is less than the carrying amount of the asset, an impairment loss is recognized for the amount by which the carrying amount of the asset exceeds its fair value.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

Effective June 1, 2019, the Company adopted Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2016-02, Leases, which sets out the principle for the recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of leases for both parties to a contract (i.e., lessees and lessors). The new standard requires lessees to classify leases as either finance or operating leases and record a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with a term of greater than 12 months regardless of their classification. An accounting policy election may be made to account for leases with a term of 12 months or less similar to existing guidance for operating leases today. ASU No. 2016-02 supersedes the existing guidance on accounting for leases. In July 2018, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued ASU No. 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements, which allows for an optional transition method for the adoption of Topic 842. The two permitted transition methods are now the modified retrospective approach, which applies the new lease requirements at the beginning of the earliest period presented, and the optional transition method, which applies the new lease requirements through a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption. ASU 2016-02 is effective for our fiscal year ended May 31, 2020 and the interim periods within that year. The Company adopted this standard in the first quarter of fiscal 2020 using the optional transition method. The Company also elected the practical expedients that allow us to carry forward the historical lease classification. The Company has established an inventory of existing leases and implemented a new process of evaluating the classification of each lease. The financial impact of the adoption of the new standard at June 1, 2019 increased total assets and total liabilities by approximately $690,000. The financial impact of the adoption primarily relates to the capitalization of right-of-use assets and recognition of lease liabilities related to operating leases.

Financial instruments that potentially subject the Company to concentrations of credit risk consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, certificates of deposit, marketable securities and accounts receivable. The Company places its cash equivalents with high-credit quality financial institutions and brokerage houses. The Company has substantially all of its cash in four bank accounts. At times, such amounts may exceed federally insured limits. The Company holds its marketable securities in brokerage accounts. The Company has not experienced losses in any such accounts. As a percentage of revenue, the three largest customers consisted of 54.3% of the net accounts receivable balance at May 31, 2021.

A reconciliation of the provision for income taxes computed at the federal statutory rates of 21.0% for fiscal 2021 and fiscal 2020 to the reported amounts is as follows:

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

The components of the provision for income taxes are as follows:

The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to significant portions of the deferred income tax assets at May 31, 2021 and 2020 are as follows:

The Company believes that it is more likely than not that it will realize the benefits of its deferred tax assets based primarily on the Company’s history of and projections for taxable income in the future. The federal net operating loss carryforwards may be used indefinitely, and the state carryforwards are generally usable for 20 years.

The Company recognizes interest and penalties associated with tax matters as selling, general and administrative expenses and includes accrued interest and penalties with accrued and other liabilities in the consolidated balance sheets.

On March 27, 2020, the CARES Act was signed into law in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. The CARES Act provides numerous tax provisions and stimulus measures, including temporary changes regarding the prior and future utilization of net operating losses, temporary changes to the prior and future limitations on interest deductions, and technical corrections from prior tax legislation for tax depreciation of certain qualified improvement property. The Company has evaluated the provisions of the CARES Act relating to income taxes which resulted in the ability to carryback net operating losses and file for a federal tax refund of approximately $586,000 which was recorded in the May 31, 2020 consolidated balance sheet. The amount was subsequently collected in April 2021.

In the third quarter of fiscal 2018, the Company discovered it had not filed required information returns related to a foreign bank account opened by a subsidiary in fiscal 2016 with contributions totaling approximately $25,000. The Company accrued an expense of $30,000 with a charge to selling, general and administrative expenses for potential penalties that may be assessed. The Company monitored this reserve periodically to determine if it was more-likely-than-not that penalties will be assessed. The reserve was reversed in fiscal 2021 due to the expiration of the statute of limitations on the returns.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefit as follows:

The Company’s federal and state income tax returns prior to fiscal year 2018 are closed.

The Company leases the space for its three offices in New York City, Hauppauge and New Jersey. Under ASC 842, at contract inception we determine whether the contract is or contains a lease and whether the lease should be classified as an operating or finance lease. Operating leases are in right-of-use assets and operating lease liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets.

The Company’s leases for its three offices are classified as operating leases.

The lease agreements for New York City, Hauppauge and New Jersey expire on August 31, 2022, December 31, 2023 and May 31, 2027, respectively, and do not include any renewal options. During the fiscal year ended May 31, 2021, the Company extended its lease in Hauppauge, entered into a lease in a new location for its New Jersey office, and entered into a sublease agreement for the remainder of the lease in New York City. Due to the fact that the future sublease lease cash inflows will be less than the carrying value of the corresponding right-of-use asset, the Company recorded a right-of-use asset impairment charge of $136,599 in the quarter ended November 30, 2020.

In addition to the monthly base amounts in the lease agreements, the Company is required to pay real estate taxes and operating expenses during the lease terms.

For the fiscal years ended May 31, 2021 and 2020, the Company’s operating lease expense for these leases was $385,000 and $417,000.

Future minimum lease payments under non-cancelable operating leases as of May 31, 2021 were as follows:

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

The following table sets forth the right-of-use assets and operating lease liabilities as of May 31, 2021:

The weighted average remaining lease term for the Company’s operating leases is 3.3 years.

On November 27, 2019, TSR closed on the Credit Facility pursuant to a Loan and Security Agreement with the Lender that initially provided up to $7,000,000 in funding to TSR and its direct and indirect subsidiaries, TSR Consulting Services, Inc., Logixtech Solutions, LLC and Eurologix, S.A.R.L., each of which, together with TSR, is a borrower under the Credit Facility. Each of the borrowers has provided a security interest to the Lender in all of their respective assets to secure amounts borrowed under the Credit Facility.

TSR expects to utilize the Credit Facility for working capital and general corporate purposes. TSR had also expected to utilize the Credit Facility to complete the Repurchase (as defined below) and make the Settlement Payment (as defined below); however, TSR did not complete the Repurchase and make the Settlement Payment prior to the December 30, 2019 deadline established in the Credit Facility for such use.

Because TSR did not complete the Repurchase and make the Settlement Payment prior to the December 30, 2019 deadline, the maximum amount that may now be advanced under the Credit Facility at any time shall not exceed $2,000,000.

Advances under the Credit Facility accrue interest at a rate per annum equal to (x) the “base rate” or “prime rate” announced by Citibank, N.A. from time to time, which shall be increased or decreased, as the case may be, in an amount equal to each increase or decrease in such “base rate” or “prime rate,” plus (y) 1.75%. The prime rate as of May 31, 2021 was 3.25%, indicating an interest rate of 5.0% on the Credit Facility. The initial term of the Credit Facility is 5 years, which shall automatically renew for successive 5-year periods unless either TSR or the Lender gives written notice to the other of termination at least 60 days prior to the expiration date of the then-current term.

TSR is obliged to satisfy certain financial covenants and minimum borrowing requirements under the Credit Facility, and to pay certain fees, including prepayment fees, and provide certain financial information to the Lender.

As of May 31, 2021, the net borrowings outstanding against this Credit Facility were $92,527. The amount the Company has borrowed fluctuates and, at times, it has utilized the maximum amount of $2,000,000 available under the facility to fund its payroll and other obligations.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

On April 1, 2020, the Company entered into a binding term sheet (“Term Sheet”) with Zeff Capital, L.P. (“Zeff”) pursuant to which it agreed to pay Zeff an amount of $900,000 over a period of three years in cash or cash and stock in settlement of expenses incurred by Zeff during its solicitations in 2018 and 2019 in connection with the annual meetings of the Company, the costs incurred in connection with the litigation initiated by and against the Company as well as negotiation, execution and enforcement of the Settlement and Release Agreement, dated as of August 30, 2019, by and between the Company, Zeff and certain other parties (See Note 7). In exchange for certain releases, the Term Sheet calls for a cash payment of $300,000 on June 30, 2021, a second cash payment of $300,000 on June 30, 2022 and a third payment of $300,000 also on June 30, 2022, which can be paid in cash or common stock at the Company’s option. There is no interest due on these payments. The $300,000 payment due on June 30, 2021 was paid subsequent to the end of the fiscal year. The agreement also has protections to defer such payment dates so that the debt covenants with the Company’s Lender are not breached. On August 13, 2020, the Company, Zeff, Zeff Holding Company, LLC and Daniel Zeff entered into a settlement agreement to reflect these terms. Any installment payment which is deferred as permitted above will accrue interest at the prime rate plus 3.75%, and Zeff shall thereby have the option to convert such deferred amounts (plus accrued interest if any) into shares of the Company’s stock. The Company accrued $818,000, the estimated present value of these payments using an effective interest rate of 5%, in the quarter ended February 29, 2020, as the events relating to the expense occurred prior to such date. The estimated present value of these payments is $867,000 at May 31, 2021.

Rights Plan / Preferred Stock

Amended and Restated Rights Agreement

On August 29, 2018, the Board of Directors of the Company declared a dividend of one preferred share purchase right (a “Right”) for each share of common stock, par value $0.01 per share (“Common Stock”), of the Company outstanding on August 29, 2018 to the stockholders of record on that date. In connection with the distribution of the Rights, the Company entered into a Rights Agreement, dated as of August 29, 2018, between the Company and Continental Stock Transfer & Trust Company, as “Rights Agent”. Each Right entitled the registered holder to purchase from the Company one one-hundredth of a share of Class A Preferred Stock, Series One, par value $0.01 per share (“Preferred Stock”), of the Company at a price of $24.78 per one one-hundredth of a share of Preferred Stock represented by a Right, subject to adjustment.

On August 30, 2019, the Company entered into a settlement and release agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc., Robert Fitzgerald, Fintech Consulting LLC and Tajuddin Haslani (collectively, the “Investor Parties”), pursuant to which the Company agreed to, among other things, amend and restate the Rights Agreement to provide that a “Distribution Date” (as defined below) shall not occur as a result of any request by any of the Investor Parties calling for a special meeting pursuant to Article II, Section 5 of the Amended and Restated By-Laws of the Company in accordance with the terms of the Settlement Agreement (See Note 7, “Other Matters.”). Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the Company amended and restated the Rights Agreement on September 3, 2019 (the “A&R Rights Agreement”) to confirm that a Distribution Date (as defined in the A&R Rights Agreement) shall not occur as a result of any request by any of the Investor Parties for a special meeting of the Company’s stockholders.

First Amendment to A&R Rights Agreement

On January 5, 2021, the disinterested members of the Board of Directors of the Company approved a waiver for QAR Industries, Inc. to complete its proposed acquisition of shares owned by Fintech Consulting LLC (the “Acquisition”) under the Company’s A&R Rights Agreement so that a Distribution Date would not occur as a result of the Acquisition. On February 4, 2021, the Company entered into that certain First Amendment to the A&R Rights Agreement with the Rights Agent, which provides that a distribution date shall not occur as a result of the Acquisition.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

Second Amendment to A&R Rights Agreement and Termination of A&R Rights Agreement as of March 31, 2021

At the Company’s combined 2019 and 2020 annual meeting of stockholders held on November 19, 2020, the Company’s stockholders approved an advisory vote to terminate the Company’s A&R Rights Agreement no later than March 31, 2021. On March 31, 2021, the Company entered into that certain Second Amendment to A&R Rights Agreement with the Rights Agent, pursuant to which the Expiration Date was advanced from August 29, 2021 to March 31, 2021. As a result of this amendment, effective as of the close of business on March 31, 2021, the Rights expired and are no longer outstanding and the A&R Rights Agreement was terminated by its terms.

Following the expiration of the Rights and the termination of the A&R Rights Agreement on April 1, 2021, the Company filed a Certificate of Elimination (the “Certificate of Elimination”) with the Secretary of State of the State of Delaware eliminating the Class A Preferred Shares and returning them to be authorized but unissued and non-designated shares of the Company’s preferred stock.

From time to time, the Company is party to various lawsuits, some involving material amounts. Except for the litigation disclosed below, management is not aware of any lawsuits that would have a material adverse impact on the consolidated financial position of the Company.

Paskowitz Stockholder Litigation

On October 16, 2018, the Company was served with a complaint filed on October 11, 2018 in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Queens County, by Susan Paskowitz, a stockholder of the Company, against the Company; Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes; former directors Christopher Hughes, Raymond A. Roel, Brian J. Mangan, Regina Dowd, James J. Hill, William Kelly, and Eric Stein; as well as stockholders Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC (the “Stockholder Litigation”). The complaint purported to be a class action lawsuit asserting claims on behalf of all minority stockholders of the Company. Ms. Paskowitz alleged the following: the sale by Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes of an aggregate of 819,491 shares of the Company’s common stock (“controlling interest”) to Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC was in breach of Joseph F. Hughes’ and Winifred M. Hughes’ fiduciary duties and to the detriment of the Company’s minority stockholders; the former members of the Board of Directors of the Company named in the complaint breached their fiduciary duties by failing to immediately adopt a rights plan that would have prevented Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes from selling their shares and preserved a higher premium for all stockholders; Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC Zeff, QAR, and Fintech are “partners” and constitute a “group.” Ms. Paskowitz also asserted that Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC aided and abetted Joseph F. Hughes’ and Winifred M. Hughes’ conduct, and ultimately sought to buy out the remaining shares of the Company at an unfair price.

On June 14, 2019, Ms. Paskowitz filed an amended complaint in the Stockholder Litigation in the Supreme Court of the State of New York, Queens County with the court against the former members of the Board of Directors and Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC, which asserted substantially similar allegations to those contained in the October 11, 2018 complaint, but omitted Regina Dowd, Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes as defendants. In addition to the former members of the Board of Directors named in the original complaint, the amended complaint named former directors Ira Cohen, Joseph Pennacchio, and William Kelly as defendants. The amended complaint also asserted a derivative claim purportedly on behalf of the Company against the named former members of the Board of Directors. The amended complaint sought declaratory judgment and unspecified monetary damages. The complaint requested: (1) a declaration from the court that the former members of the Board of Directors named in the complaint breached their fiduciary duties by failing to timely adopt a stockholder rights plan, which resulted in the loss of the ability to auction the Company off to the highest bidder without interference from Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC; (2) damages derivatively on behalf of the Company for unspecified harm caused by the named Directors’ alleged breaches of fiduciary duties; (3) damages and equitable relief derivatively on behalf of the Company for the named Directors’ alleged failure to adopt proper corporate governance practices; and (4) damages and injunctive relief against Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC based on their knowing dissemination of false or misleading public statements concerning their status as a group. The complaint did not assign any monetary values to alleged damages.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

On July 15, 2019, the Company filed an answer to the amended complaint in the Stockholder Litigation and cross-claims against Zeff Capital, L.P., QAR Industries, Inc. and Fintech Consulting LLC for breaches of their fiduciary duties, aiding and abetting breaches of fiduciary duties, and indemnification and contribution based on their misappropriation of material nonpublic information and their failure to disclose complete and accurate information in SEC filings concerning their group actions to attempt a creeping takeover of the Company, which was thereafter amended on July 26, 2019.

On December 21, 2018, the Company filed a complaint in the United States District Court, Southern District of New York, against Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc., Robert Fitzgerald, Fintech Consulting LLC, and Tajuddin Haslani for violations of the disclosure and anti-fraud requirements of the federal securities laws under Sections 13(d) and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Exchange Act”), and the related rules and regulations promulgated by the SEC, for failing to disclose to the Company and its stockholders their formation of a group and the group’s intention to seize control of the Company (the “SDNY Action”). The complaint requested that the court, among other things, declare that the defendants have solicited proxies without filing timely, accurate and complete reports on Schedule 13D and Schedule 14A in violation of Sections 13(d) and 14(a) of the Exchange Act, direct the defendants to file with the SEC complete and accurate disclosures, enjoin the defendants from voting any of their shares prior to such time as complete and accurate disclosures have been filed, and enjoin the defendants from further violations of the Exchange Act with respect to the securities of the Company.

On January 7, 2019, Ms. Paskowitz filed a related action against Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc., Robert Fitzgerald, Fintech Consulting LLC, and Tajuddin Haslani in the Southern District of New York, which asserted claims against them for breach of fiduciary duty and under federal securities laws similar to those asserted in the Company’s action. Although the Company is not a party to Ms. Paskowitz’s action, the court has determined to treat the Company’s and Ms. Paskowitz’s respective actions as related.

On August 7, 2019, following the Company’s initial rescheduling of the 2018 Annual Meeting for September 13, 2019 and the filing of Preliminary Proxy Statements by the Company and Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Capital, L.P. filed a complaint in the Delaware Court of Chancery against the Company seeking an order requiring the Company to hold its next annual meeting of stockholders on or around September 13, 2019, and obligating the Company to elect Class I and Class III directors at that annual meeting.

On August 13, 2019, the Company filed a motion for preliminary injunction in the SDNY Action in advance of the Company’s 2018 Annual Meeting originally scheduled for September 13, 2019, and requested leave to file a motion for expedited discovery. The Court denied the Company’s motion for preliminary injunction but ordered Zeff to “make clear that the second set of directors” described by Zeff in its preliminary proxy statement “is contingent upon the resolution of a proceeding in Delaware Chancery Court.”

On August 30, 2019, the Company entered into a settlement and release agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) with Zeff Capital, L.P., Zeff Holding Company, LLC, Daniel Zeff, QAR Industries, Inc., Robert Fitzgerald, Fintech Consulting LLC and Tajuddin Haslani (collectively, the “Investor Parties”) with respect to the proxy contest pertaining to the election of directors at the 2018 Annual Meeting, which was held on October 22, 2019. Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, the parties agreed to forever settle and resolve any and all disputes between the parties, including without limitation disputes arising out of or relating to the following litigations:

(i) The complaint relating to alleged breaches of fiduciary duties filed on November 1, 2018 by Fintech Consulting LLC against the Company in the Delaware Court of Chancery, which was previously dismissed voluntarily;

(ii) The complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief for violations of the federal securities laws filed on December 21, 2018 by the Company against the Investor Parties in the United States District Court in the Southern District of New York;

(iii) Cross-claims relating to alleged breaches of fiduciary duties and for indemnification and contribution filed on July 26, 2019 by the Company against the Investor Parties in New York Supreme Court, Queens County; and

(iv) The complaint to compel annual meeting of stockholders filed on August 7, 2019 by Zeff Capital, L.P. against the Company in the Delaware Court of Chancery.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

No party admitted any liability by entering into the Settlement Agreement. The Settlement Agreement did not resolve the Stockholder Litigation filed by Susan Paskowitz against the Company, Joseph F. Hughes, Winifred M. Hughes and certain former directors of the Company in the Supreme Court of the State of New York on October 11, 2018.

Concurrently with the Settlement Agreement, the parties entered into a share repurchase agreement (the “Repurchase Agreement”) which provided for the purchase by the Company and Christopher Hughes, the Company’s former President and Chief Executive Officer, of the shares of the Company’s Common Stock held by the Investor Parties (the “Repurchase”). The Settlement Agreement also contemplated that, if the Repurchase was completed, the Company would make a settlement payment to the Investor Parties at the closing of the Repurchase in an amount of approximately $1,500,000 (the “Settlement Payment”). However, the Repurchase and Settlement Payment were not completed by the deadline of December 30, 2019.

Pursuant to the Settlement Agreement, (1) the Company agreed to adopt an amendment to the Company’s Amended and Restated By-Laws, dated April 9, 2015 (the “By-Laws Amendment”), providing that stockholders of the Company owning at least forty percent (40%) of the issued and outstanding Common Stock may request a special meeting of stockholders; (2) the Investor Parties agreed not to take any action to call or otherwise cause a special meeting of stockholders to occur prior to December 30, 2019 (unless the Company had failed to hold the 2018 Annual Meeting); (3) the Company agreed to amend and restate the Company’s Rights Agreement, dated August 29, 2018 (the “Amended Rights Agreement”), to confirm that a Distribution Date (as defined in the Amended Rights Agreement) shall not occur as a result of any request by any of the Investor Parties for a special meeting; (4) the Company agreed that prior to the earlier of (A) the completion of the Repurchase and the payment of the Settlement Payment and (B) January 1, 2020, the Board of Directors shall not consist of more than seven (7) directors.

Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, the two nominees for director made by Zeff Capital, L.P. were elected as directors at the Company’s 2018 Annual Meeting held on October 22, 2019. Please see the Company’s current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on October 21, 2019 for more information about the background of the election of directors at the Company’s 2018 Annual Meeting.

Pursuant to the terms of the Settlement Agreement, inasmuch as the Repurchase was not completed and the Settlement Payment was not made by December 30, 2019, the members of the Board of Directors (other than the two directors who were nominated by Zeff Capital, L.P. and elected as directors at the 2018 Annual Meeting) resigned from the Board effective 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on December 30, 2019. Immediately thereafter, the two remaining directors appointed Robert Fitzgerald to the Board of Directors. Please see the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed with the SEC on December 31, 2019 for more information about the background and the appointment of Robert Fitzgerald.

The foregoing is not a complete description of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and the Share Repurchase Agreement. For a further description of the terms of the Settlement Agreement and the Share Repurchase Agreement, including copies of the Settlement Agreement and Share Repurchase Agreement, please see the Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K filed by the Company with the SEC on September 3, 2019.

On October 21, 2019, the Company entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (the “MOU”) with Susan Paskowitz providing for the settlement of the Stockholder Litigation filed by Ms. Paskowitz on October 11, 2018. The MOU provides for the settlement of the claims by Ms. Paskowitz that (1) the members of the Board named in the original complaint allegedly breached their fiduciary duties by failing to immediately adopt a rights plan that would have prevented the sale by Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes of an aggregate of 819,491 shares of the Company’s common stock to the Investor Parties; (2) the members of the Board named in the amended complaint allegedly breached their fiduciary duties and failed to adopt proper corporate governance practices; and (3) the Investor Parties acted as “partners” and constituted a “group” in their purchase of shares from Joseph F. Hughes and Winifred M. Hughes and knowingly disseminated false or misleading public statements concerning their status as a group.

Pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the Company will (1) implement certain corporate governance reforms described in the MOU within 30 days of a final order and judgment entered by the court, and keep these corporate governance reforms in place for 5 years from the time of the final order and judgment; and (2) acknowledge that the plaintiff, Ms. Paskowitz, and her counsel provided a substantial benefit to the Company and its stockholders through the prosecution of the Stockholder Litigation and other related actions filed by Ms. Paskowitz described above.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

On December 16, 2019, the Company entered into a Stipulation and Agreement of Settlement (the “Stipulation”) with Susan Paskowitz in the Stockholder Litigation, which retained the terms and conditions of settlement of the Stockholder Litigation contained in the MOU described in the preceding paragraph, with the addition that the Company will pay to plaintiff’s counsel an award of attorneys’ fees and reimbursement of expenses in the amount of $260,000 (collectively, the “Stockholder Litigation Settlement”). The Stockholder Litigation Settlement does not contain any admission of liability, wrongdoing or responsibility by any of the parties, and provides for mutual releases by all parties. Each stockholder of the Company is a member of the plaintiff class unless such stockholder opts out of the class. The Stipulation is independent of the Settlement Agreement and Repurchase Agreement that the Company had entered into with the Investor Parties.

On December 24, 2019, Ms. Paskowitz moved for preliminary approval of the Stipulation. On May 21, 2020, the Court entered an order preliminarily approving the Stipulation. The Court conducted a settlement hearing on April 20, 2021 to consider final approval of the Stipulation. On May 25, 2021, the Court issued a final order and judgment approving all material terms in the Stipulation. Pursuant to the terms of the final order, the Court fully and finally approved the settlement set forth in the Stipulation and dismissed the Stockholder Litigation with prejudice. The settlement payment was paid by the Company’s insurance provider under its insurance policy.

Please also refer to Note 8, Termination of Former CEO, regarding an ongoing lawsuit originally filed by the Company’s former Chief Executive Officer against the Company in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in March 2020.

The Company terminated Christopher Hughes, the former Chief Executive Officer of the Company (“Hughes”), effective February 29, 2020 for “Cause” as defined in Section 6(a) of his Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated August 9, 2018 (the “Employment Agreement”). Despite having already been terminated from employment, on March 2, 2020, the Company received a letter from Mr. Hughes, providing notice of his intent to resign for “Good Reason” as defined in Section 7(c) of the Employment Agreement pursuant to which he claimed to be entitled to the “Enhanced Severance Amount” under the Employment Agreement. Hughes filed a complaint against the Company in the Supreme Court of the State of New York in March 2020 alleging two causes of action: (1) breach of his employment contract; and (2) breach of duty of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiff Hughes alleges that he was terminated without cause or in the alternative that he resigned for good reason and therefore, pursuant to the Employment Agreement, Hughes seeks severance pay in the amount of $1,000,000 and reasonable costs and attorney’s fees. The Company denies Plaintiff’s allegations in their entirety and has filed counterclaims against Plaintiff for (1) declaratory relief; (2) breach of confidence/non-compete agreement; (3) declaratory and injunctive relief – confidence/non-compete; (4) tortious interference with current and prospective contractual and economic relations; (5) breach of fiduciary duty; (6) misappropriation of trade secrets; (7) declaratory and injunctive relief – unfair competition; and (8) conversion. The Company intends to vigorously defend and litigate this matter while recognizing the costs of litigation, including that it may divert the attention of management and key personnel from business operations.

The COVID-19 outbreak in the United States has caused business disruption through mandated and voluntary closing of various businesses. While the disruption is currently expected to be temporary, there is considerable uncertainty around the duration of the closings and the impact of the pandemic on our business. Therefore, the Company expects this matter to continue to negatively impact its operating results in future periods. However, the full financial impact and duration cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

On April 15, 2020, the Company received loan proceeds of $6,659,220 under the Paycheck Protection Program (the “PPP Loan”). The Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”) was established under the CARES Act and is administered by the U.S. Small Business Administration (“SBA”). The PPP Loan to the Company is being made through JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., a national banking association (the “PPP Lender”).

In addition,March 2021, the Company submitted a PPP Loan forgiveness application to the SBA through the PPP Lender.

On July 7, 2021, the Company received notification from the PPP Lender that the SBA approved the Company’s application for forgiveness of the entire principal amount of the PPP Loan, plus all accrued interest. The PPP Lender will apply the forgiveness amount to satisfy the PPP Loan. The Company has no further obligations with respect to the PPP Loan. The forgiveness of the PPP Loan will be recognized during the Company’s fiscal 2022 first quarter ending August 31, 2021.

On September 1, 2020, the Company completed the acquisition of all of the outstanding stock of Geneva Consulting Group, Inc., a New York corporation (“Geneva”) and provider of temporary and permanent information technology personnel based in Port Washington, New York. The stock of Geneva was purchased from the three shareholders of Geneva (the “Sellers”), none of which had, or will have following the acquisition, a material relationship with the Company or its affiliates.

The purchase price for the shares of Geneva was comprised of the following: (i) $1,452,000 in cash paid to Sellers at the closing of the acquisition, (ii) an amount of $748,000, that is equal to the amount of Geneva’s loan under the PPP that was not assumed by the Company and is expected to be substantially forgiven by the SBA, (iii) an amount up to $300,000 which may be paid as an earnout payment in part in February 2021 and in part in August 2021 (the “Earnout Payments”), (iv) bonus payments payable in $10,000 increments, (v) $747,000 for the net working capital of Geneva as of closing and (vi) other purchase price adjustments of which $36,000 has been paid to date. Any Earnout Payments and bonus payments will be determined based upon the achievement of certain criteria relating to the number the Company’s contractors working full-time at the Company’s clients on such dates.

The purchase agreement for the Geneva acquisition provided for a earn-out of up to $300,000 plus bonus amounts in $10,000 increments which are earned through August 31, 2021. The initial earn-out liability was valued at its fair value using an option pricing based approach with a risk-neutral framework using Black Scholes due to the option-like nature of the earn-out payment structure (Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy). The earn-out was revalued quarterly prior to the settlement discussed below, using a present value approach and any resulting increase or decrease was recorded into selling, general and administrative expenses. Any changes in the amount of the actual results and forecasted scenarios could impact the fair value. Significant judgment was employed in determining the appropriateness of the assumptions used in calculating the fair value of the earn-out as of the acquisition date and subsequent period ends.

On March 17, 2021, the Company entered into an agreement with the Sellers’ representatives pursuant to which the parties agreed to settle certain interpretive differences regarding the Sellers’ entitlement to the bonus payments described above. Pursuant to this agreement, and in full satisfaction of the Company’s obligations for deferred payments under the purchase agreement for the Geneva acquisition, the Sellers’ representative acknowledged receipt of the first Earnout Payment in the amount of $100,000, the parties agreed that the Company would make aggregate bonus payments to the Sellers’ representatives in the amount of $260,000, and the Company agreed to instruct the escrow agent to release to the Sellers’ representatives the second Earnout Payment in the amount of $200,000. All amounts relating to the Earnout Payments and bonus payments that had not been paid as of the date of the agreement were either paid by the Company or released by the escrow agent on March 18, 2021. No further earnout or bonus amounts can be earned or will be paid subsequent to March 18, 2021.

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

The acquisition was accounted for as an acquisition of a business in accordance with the acquisition method of accounting. The acquired assets and assumed liabilities have been recorded at their estimated fair values. The Company determined the estimated fair values with the assistance of valuations performed by an independent third-party specialist. There have been no changes made to the valuation as of May 31, 2021.

The Company has incurred approximately $498,000 in legal fees, business broker fees, valuation services, accounting fees and other expenses to complete the Geneva acquisition, of which $220,000 of these expenses were recorded in the quarter ended February 28, 2021. This amount primarily relates to the accrual of additional bonus payments to the Sellers of $210,000 related to the March 17, 2021 agreement discussed above. All acquisition related costs have been expensed as incurred and included in selling, general and administrative expenses.

The following table summarizes the components of the purchase price at fair values at September 1, 2020:

The following table summarizes the allocation of purchase price at preliminary estimated fair values at September 1, 2020:

The following unaudited pro forma financial information presents the combined operating results of the Company and Geneva as if the acquisition had occurred as of the beginning of the earliest period presented. Pro forma data is subject to various assumptions and estimates and is presented for informational purposes only. This pro forma data does not purport to represent or be indicative of the consolidated operating results that would have been reported had the transaction been completed as described herein, and the data should not be taken as indicative of future operating results.

Unaudited pro forma financial information assuming the acquisition of Geneva as of June 1, 2019 is presented in the following table (in thousands):

TSR, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS, Continued

May 31, 2021 and 2020

Goodwill is recorded when the purchase price paid for an acquisition exceeds the estimated fair value of the net identified tangible and intangible assets acquired. Goodwill is not amortized but is subject to impairment analysis at least once annually or more frequently upon the occurrence of an event or when circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of a unit is greater than its fair value.

The Company amortizes its intangible assets over their estimated useful lives and will review these assets for impairment when there is evidence that events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. Recoverability of these assets is measured by comparing the carrying amounts to the future undiscounted cash flows the assets are expected to generate. If intangible assets are considered to be impaired, the impairment to be recognized equals the amount by which the carrying value of the asset exceeds its fair market value.

Intangible assets identified in the Geneva acquisition are as follows: