Part I - Financial Information

Item 1. Financial Statements

Hecla Mining Company and Subsidiaries

Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets (Unaudited)

(In thousands, except shares)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

Hecla Mining Company and Subsidiaries

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations and Comprehensive Income (Loss) (Unaudited)

(Dollars and shares in thousands, except for per-share amounts)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

Hecla Mining Company and Subsidiaries

Condensed Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows (Unaudited)

(In thousands)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

Hecla Mining Company and Subsidiaries

 Condensed Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity (Unaudited)

(Dollars are in thousands, except for share and per share amounts)

The accompanying notes are an integral part of the interim condensed consolidated financial statements.

Note 1.    Basis of Preparation of Financial Statements

In the opinion of management, the accompanying unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements and notes to the unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements contain all adjustments, consisting of normal recurring items and items which are nonrecurring, necessary to present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Hecla Mining Company and its consolidated subsidiaries (except as the context otherwise requires,(in this report, "Hecla" or "the Company" or “we” or “our” or “us”) refers to Hecla Mining Company and our subsidiaries, unless the context requires otherwise).  These unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and related footnotes as set forth in our annual report filed on Form 10-K10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016,2019, as it may be amended from time to time.

The results of operations for the periods presented may not be indicative of those which may be expected for a full year.  The unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements have been prepared pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC").  Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in audited financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“GAAP”) have been condensed or omitted pursuant to those rules and regulations, although we believe that the disclosures are adequate for the information not to be misleading.

Certain condensed consolidated financial statement amounts for the prior period have been reclassified to conform to the current period presentation. These reclassifications had no effect on the net income, comprehensive income, or accumulated deficit as previously reported.

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 as of the date of the financial statements, the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period, and the disclosures of contingent liabilities.  Accordingly, ultimate results could differ materially from those estimates.     

On September 13, 2016, we completedThe 2019 novel strain of coronavirus ("COVID-19") was characterized as a global pandemic by the acquisitionWorld Health Organization on March 11, 2020, and COVID-19 has resulted in travel restrictions and business slowdowns or shutdowns in affected areas. In late March 2020, the Government of Mines Management, Inc. ("Mines Management"), giving us ownershipQuebec ordered the mining industry to reduce to minimum operations as part of the Montanore projectfight against COVID-19, causing us to suspend our Casa Berardi operations from approximately March 24 until April 15, when mining operations resumed. In early April, the Government of Mexico issued a similar order causing us to suspend our San Sebastian operations until May 30. In addition, restrictions imposed by the State of Alaska in Northwest Montana.late March have caused us to revise the normal operating procedures for staffing operations at Greens Creek. These suspension orders impacted us in the first half of 2020 by curtailing our expected production of gold at Casa Berardi by approximately 5,200 ounces in March 2020 and approximately 6,500 ounces in April 2020, which resulted in a reduction in related revenue. We continued to incur costs at Casa Berardi and San Sebastian while operations were suspended. At Casa Berardi and San Sebastian, suspension costs in the firstnine months of 2020 totaled $1.6 million and $1.1 million, respectively. In addition, we have incurred costs of approximately $1.9 million in the firstnine months of 2020 related to quarantining employees at Greens Creek, which started in late March 2020. At Lucky Friday and Nevada Operations, COVID-19 procedures have been implemented without a significant impact on production or operating costs. It is possible that future restrictions at any of our operations could have an adverse impact on operations or 2020 financial results, including materially so, beyond the third quarter of 2020.

We have taken precautionary measures to mitigate the impact of COVID-19, including implementing operational plans and practices and increasing our cash reserves through a temporary draw-down of our revolving credit facility, which has since been fully repaid (see Note 9 for more information). As long as they are required, the operational practices implemented could have an adverse impact on our operating results due to deferred production and revenues or additional costs. We continue to monitor the rapidly evolving situation and guidance from federal, state, local and foreign governments and public health authorities and may take additional actions based on their recommendations. The unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements included herein reflect our ownershipextent of the assets previously held by Mines Management asimpact of COVID-19 on our business and financial results will also depend on future developments, including the duration and spread of the September 13, 2016 acquisition date.outbreak within the markets in which we operate and the related impact on prices, demand, creditworthiness and other market conditions and governmental reactions, all of which are highly uncertain.

Note 2.    Investments

Investments

Our current investments, which are classified as "available for sale"At September 30,2020 and consist of bonds having maturities of greater than 90 days and less than 365 days, had a fair value and cost basis of $33.0 million and $29.1 million at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively. During the first nine months of 2017, we had purchases of such investments of $35.3 million and maturities of $31.2 million. Our current investments at September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016 consisted of the following (in thousands):

At September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016,2019, the fair value of our non-current investments was $7.1$17.4 million and $5.0$6.2 million, respectively.  Our non-current investments consist of marketable equity securities which are carried at fair value, and are primarily classified as “available-for-sale.”value. The cost basis of our non-current investments was approximately $5.7$11.3 million and $4.0$9.8 million at September 30,2020 and December 31,2019, respectively. During the firstnine months of 2020 and 2019, we recognized $9.4 million in net unrealized gains and $1.2 million in net unrealized losses, respectively, in current earnings. During the nine months ended September 30, 2017 2020 and December 31, 2016, respectively. In the first nine months of 2017 and 2016,2019, we acquired marketable equity securities having a cost basis of $1.6$1.7 million and $0.4 million, respectively. In the firstnine months of 2019, we sold marketable equity securities having a cost basis of $0.9 million respectively. During the first quarterfor proceeds of 2016, we recognized an impairment charge against current earnings$1.8 million, resulting in a gain of $1.0 million, as we determined the impairment to be other-than-temporary.$0.9 million.

Note 3.   Income Taxes

Major components of our income tax (benefit) provisionbenefit (provision) for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2017 2020 and 20162019 are as follows (in thousands):

As of September 30, 2017, we have a net deferred tax asset in the U.S. of $44.7 million and a net deferred tax liability in Canada of $122.7 million, for a consolidated worldwide net deferred tax liability of $78.0 million. Our ability to utilize our deferred tax assets depends on future taxable income generated from operations. In the first quarter of 2017, we received consent from the Internal Revenue Service to permit us to take a different income tax position relating to the timing of deductions for the #4 Shaft development costs at Lucky Friday. This tax accounting method change substantially revised the timing of deductions for these costs for regular tax and Alternative Minimum Tax ("AMT") relative to our projected life of mine and projected taxable income. These timing changes caused us to revise our assessment of the ability to generate sufficient future taxable income to realize our deferred tax assets, resulting in a valuation allowance release of approximately $15 million. At September 30, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the balances of the valuation allowances on our deferred tax assets were $72 million and $100 million, respectively, primarily for net operating losses and tax credit carryforwards. The amount of the deferred tax asset considered recoverable, however, could be reduced in the near term if estimates of future taxable income are reduced.

The current income tax provisions(provisions) benefits for the three and nine months ended September30, 20172020 and 20162019 vary from the amounts that would have resulted from applying the statutory income tax rate to pre-tax income due primarily to the impact of the change in accounting method treatment of the #4 Shaft development costs described above, the impact of taxation in foreign jurisdictions and a valuation allowance on the Company's status as an indefinite AMT taxpayer.majority of U.S. deferred tax assets.

We have historically calculatedIn 2018, we acquired through the provision for income taxes during interim reporting periods by applying an estimateacquisition of Klondex Mines Ltd. a U.S. consolidated tax group ("Nevada U.S. Group") that did not join the annual effectiveexisting consolidated U.S. tax rate ("AETR"group of Hecla Mining Company and subsidiaries (“Hecla U.S.”). For Hecla U.S., we recorded a full valuation allowance in the U.S. in December 2017 as a result of U.S. tax reform. Our circumstances at September 30,2020 continued to support a full valuation allowance in the U.S. for the full fiscal year to “ordinary” pretax income or loss (excluding unusual or infrequently occurring discrete items) for the reporting period. We have determined that since small changes in estimated annual “ordinary” pre-tax income would result in significant changesHecla U.S. group.

As of September 30,2020, we had a net deferred tax liability in the estimated AETR, U.S. of $34.9 million, a net deferred tax liability in Canada of $94.6 million, and a net deferred tax asset in Mexico of $3.4 million, for a consolidated worldwide net deferred tax liability of $126.1 million.

On March 27, 2020, the AETR method would Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act was signed into law. The CARES Act, among other things, includes provisions relating to refundable payroll tax credits, deferment of employer side social security payments, net operating loss carryback periods, alternative minimum tax credit refunds, modifications to the net interest deduction limitations and technical corrections to tax depreciation methods for qualified improvement property. The CARES Act has not provide had a reliable estimate formaterial impact on the fiscal three- and nine-month periods ended Company as of September 30, 2017. Therefore,2020; however, we will continue to examine the impacts the CARES Act may have used a discrete effective tax rate method to calculate taxes for the fiscal three- and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2017.on our business.

Note 4.    Commitments, Contingencies and Obligations

General

We follow GAAP guidance in determining our accruals and disclosures with respect to loss contingencies, and evaluate such accruals and contingencies for each reporting period. Accordingly, estimated losses from loss contingencies are accrued by a charge to income when information available prior to issuance of the financial statements indicates that it is probable that a liability could be incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Legal expenses associated with the contingency are expensed as incurred. If a loss contingency is not probable or reasonably estimable, disclosure of the loss contingency is made in the financial statements when it is at least reasonably possible that a material loss could be incurred.

Rio Grande Silver Guaranty

Our wholly-owned subsidiary, Rio Grande Silver Inc. (“Rio”), is party to a joint venture with Emerald Mining & Leasing, LLC (“EML”) and certain other parties with respect to a land package in the Creede Mining District of Colorado that is adjacent to other land held by Rio. Rio holds a 70% interest in the joint venture. In connection with the joint venture, we are required to guarantee certain environmental remediation-related obligations of EML to a third party up to a maximum liability to us of $2.5 million. As of September 30, 2017, we have not been required to make any payments pursuant to the guaranty. We may be required to make payments in the future, limited to the $2.5 million maximum liability, should EML fail to meet its obligations to the third party. However, to the extent that any payments are made by us under the guaranty, EML, in addition to other parties, has jointly and severally agreed to reimburse and indemnify us for any such payments. We have not recorded a liability relating to the guaranty as of September 30, 2017.

Lucky Friday Water Permit Matters

In the past, the Lucky Friday unit experienced multiple regulatory issues relating to its water discharge permits and water management more generally. All of these issues have been resolved except for one: in December 2013, the EPAEnvironmental Protection Agency ("EPA") issued to Hecla Limited a request for information under Section 308 of the Clean Water Act directing Hecla Limited to undertake a comprehensive groundwater investigation of Lucky Friday’sFriday’s tailings pond no.3 to evaluate whether the pond is causing the discharge of pollutants via seepage to groundwater that is discharging to surface water. We completed the investigation mandated by the EPA and submitted a draft report to the agency in December 2015. We are waiting for the EPA’s response and we cannot predict what further action, if any, the impact of the investigation will be.agency may take.

Hecla Limited strives to maintain its water discharges at the Lucky Friday unit in full compliance with its permits and applicable laws, however, we cannot provide assurance that in the future it will be able to fully comply with the permit limits and other regulatory requirements regarding water management.

Johnny M Mine Area near San Mateo, McKinley County and San Mateo Creek Basin, New Mexico

In May 2011, the EPA made a formal request to Hecla Mining Company for information regarding the Johnny M Mine Area near San Mateo, McKinley County, New Mexico, and asserted that Hecla Mining Company may be responsible under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA") for environmental remediation and past costs the EPA has incurred at the site. Mining at the Johnny M Mine was conducted for a limited period of time by a predecessor of our subsidiary, Hecla Limited. In August 2012, Hecla Limited and the EPA entered into a Settlement Agreement and Administrative Order on Consent for Removal Action (“Consent Order”), pursuant to which Hecla Limited agreed to pay (i) $1.1 million to the EPA for its past response costs at the site and (ii) any future response costs at the site under the Consent Order, in exchange for a covenant not to sue by the EPA. Hecla Limited paid the $1.1 million to the EPA for its past response costs and in December 2014 submitted to EPA the Engineering Evaluation and Cost Analysis (“EE/CA”) for the site. The EE/CA evaluates three alternative response actions: 1) 1) no action, 2)2) off-site disposal, and 3)3) on-site disposal. The range in estimated costs of these alternatives is $0 to $221 million. In the EE/CA, Hecla Limited recommended that EPA approve on-site disposal, which is currently estimated to cost $5.6$6.1 million, on the basis that it is the most appropriate response action under CERCLA. In June 2015, October 2019, the EPA approved the EE/CA, with a few minor conditions. The EPA still needs to publishpublished the EE/CA for a 30-day public notice and comment period, and the agency will notis expected to make a final decision on the appropriate response action untilafter the public comment process is complete. It is anticipated that Hecla Limited will implement the response action selected by the EPA pursuant to an amendment to the Consent Order or a new order. Based on the foregoing, we believe it is probable that Hecla Limited will incur a liability for remediation at the site. In the fourth quarter of 2014, we accrued $5.6 million, which continuesand in October 2019 we increased that amount to be our best estimate of that liability as$6.1 million, with the increase representing estimated costs to begin implementation of the date of this report. There can be no assuranceremedy in 2020. It is possible that Hecla Limited’sLimited’s liability will not be more than $5.6$6.1 million, or that its ultimateand any increase in liability will notcould have a material adverse effect on Hecla Limited’s or our results of operations or financial position.

The Johnny M Mine is in an area known as the San Mateo Creek Basin (“SMCB”), which is an approximately 321 square mile area in New Mexico that contains numerous legacy uranium mines and mills. In addition to Johnny M, Hecla Limited's predecessor was involved at other mining sites within the SMCB. The EPA appears to have deferred consideration of listing the SMCB site on CERCLA’s National Priorities List ("Superfund") by removing the site from its emphasis list, and is working with various potentially responsible parties ("PRPs") at the site in order to study and potentially address perceived groundwater issues within the SMCB. The EE/CA discussed above relates primarily to contaminated rock and soil at the Johnny M site, not groundwater and not elsewhere within the SMCM site. It is possible that Hecla Limited’s liability at the Johnny M Site, and for any other mine site within the SMCB at which Hecla Limited's predecessor may have operated, will be greater than our current accrual of $6.1 million due to the increased scope of required remediation.

In September 2016,July 2018, the EPA informed Hecla Limited was served with a lawsuit filedthat it and several other PRPs may be liable for cleanup of the SMCB site or for costs incurred by an individualthe EPA in state court in New Mexico alleging personal injury claims of several millions of dollars arising from alleged exposure to contaminants as a result of allegedly living on land adjacent tocleaning up the Johnny M Mine site. The case was subsequently removedEPA stated it has incurred approximately $9.6 million in response costs to federal court in New Mexico, anddate. Hecla Limited filed a motioncannot with reasonable certainty estimate the amount or range of liability, if any, relating to dismiss. We do not yet have enoughthis matter because of, among other reasons, the lack of information to conclude if Hecla Limited has any liability or to estimate any loss that it may incur.concerning the site, including the relative contributions of contamination by the various PRPs.

Carpenter Snow Creek and Barker-Hughesville Sites in Montana

In July 2010, the EPA made a formal request to Hecla Mining Company for information regarding the Carpenter Snow Creek Superfund site located in Cascade County, Montana. The Carpenter Snow Creek site is located in a historic mining district, and in the early 1980s Hecla Limited leased 6 mining claims and performed limited exploration activities at the site. Hecla Limited terminated the mining lease in 1988.

In June 2011, the EPA informed Hecla Limited that it believes Hecla Limited, amongand several other viable companies, PRPs, may be liable for cleanup of the site or for costs incurred by the EPA in cleaning up the site. The EPA stated in the June 2011 letter that it has incurred approximately $4.5 million in response costs and estimated that total remediation costs may exceed $100 million. Hecla Limited cannot with reasonable certainty estimate the amount or range of liability, if any, relating to this matter because of, among other reasons, the lack of information concerning the site.site, including the relative contributions of contamination by various other PRPs.

In February 2017, the EPA made a formal request to Hecla Mining Company for information regarding the Barker-Hughesville Mining District Superfund site located in Judith Basin and Cascade Counties, Montana. Hecla Limited submitted a response in April 2017. The Barker-Hughesville site is located in a historic mining district, and between approximately June and December 1983, Hecla Limited was party to an agreement with another mining company under which limited exploration activities occurred at or near the site. Neither

In August 2018, the EPA nor any other party has made any claims againstinformed Hecla Limited (or Hecla Mining Company), however,that it is possible that such a claim will and several other PRPs may be madeliable for cleanup of the site or for costs incurred by the EPA in cleaning up the future. Unless and until such a claim is made,site. The EPA did not include an amount of its alleged response costs to date. Hecla Limited cannot with reasonable certainty estimate the amount or range of liability, if any, relating to this matter.matter because of, among other reasons, the lack of information concerning past or anticipated future costs at the site and the relative contributions of contamination by various other PRPs.

Senior NotesClaim for Indemnification Against CoCa Mines, Inc.

In 1991, Hecla Limited acquired CoCa Mines, Inc. (“CoCa”) and its subsidiary Creede Resources, Inc. (“CRI”). CoCa and CRI previously operated in the State of Colorado, but presently have limited assets and operations. Between 2014 and 2019, a PRP alleged that CoCa and CRI are required by a 1989 agreement to indemnify it for certain environmental costs and liabilities it may incur with respect to the Nelson Tunnel/Commodore Waste Rock Pile Superfund site in Creede, Colorado. In 2016, without admitting any liability, Hecla Limited, CoCa and CRI entered into a Consent Decree with the United States and the State of Colorado settling any regulatory liability they may have had at the site. On October 30, 2019, the PRP filed a lawsuit in Mineral County, Colorado alleging, among other things, that CoCa and CRI are in breach of contract for failure to indemnify the PRP for its liability to the U.S. under CERCLA with respect to the site. In addition, the lawsuit names Hecla Limited as a defendant in its role as the shareholder of CoCa. The PRP seeks in excess of $5 million in damages, including attorneys’ fees and costs. The lawsuit will be vigorously defended and we believe strong defenses exist against all claims made therein and, as noted above, both CoCa and CRI have limited assets with which to satisfy any claim.

Litigation Related to Klondex Acquisition

On AprilSeptember 11, 2018, a lawsuit was filed in the Ontario (Canada) Superior Court of Justice by Waterton Nevada Splitter LLC against Hecla Mining Company, our subsidiary Klondex Mines Unlimited Liability Company and Havilah Mining Corporation, an entity that was formed to own the Canadian assets of Klondex that we did not acquire as part of the Klondex acquisition, and of which we own approximately 13%. The lawsuit alleges that Hecla and Havilah are in breach of contract in connection with the issuance to Waterton of warrants to purchase Hecla common stock and Havilah common shares to replace warrants to purchase Klondex common shares that Waterton owned prior to the July 2018 acquisition. The lawsuit claims Hecla and Havilah issued warrants to Waterton valued at $3.7 million but that Waterton was entitled to warrants valued at $8.9 million. We believe the lawsuit is without merit and will vigorously defend it.

On May 24, 2019, a purported Hecla stockholder filed a putative class action lawsuit in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York against Hecla and certain of our executive officers, one of whom is also a director. The complaint, purportedly brought on behalf of all purchasers of Hecla common stock from March 19, 2018 through and including May 8, 2019, asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and seeks, among other things, damages and costs and expenses. Specifically, the complaint alleges that Hecla, under the authority and control of the individual defendants, made certain material false and misleading statements and omitted certain material information regarding Hecla’s Nevada Operations unit. The complaint alleges that these misstatements and omissions artificially inflated the market price of Hecla common stock during the class period, thus purportedly harming investors. A second suit was filed on June 19, 2019, alleging virtually identical claims. We cannot predict the outcome of these lawsuits or estimate damages if plaintiffs were to prevail. We believe that these claims are without merit and intend to defend them vigorously.

Related to the above described class action lawsuits, Hecla has been named as a nominal defendant in a shareholder derivative lawsuit which names as defendants members of Hecla’s board of directors and certain officers. The case was filed on July 12, 2013, 2019 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. In general terms, the suit alleges (i) violations of Sections 10(b) and 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder and (ii) breaches of fiduciary duties by the individual defendants and seeks damages, purportedly on behalf of Hecla.

Debt

As discussed in Note 9, on February 19, 2020, we completed an offering of $500$475 million aggregate principal amount of 6.875%7.25% Senior Notes due 2021.2028. The net proceeds from the offering of the Senior Notes were used, together with cash on hand, to partially fund the acquisition of Aurizon Mines Ltd. ("Aurizon") and for general corporate purposes, including expenses related to the Aurizon acquisition. Through the acquisition of Aurizon, we acquired our Casa Berardi mine and other interests in Quebec, Canada. In 2014, we completed additional issuancesredeem all of our previously-outstanding 6.875% Senior Notes that were due in the aggregate2021 and had a principal amountbalance of $6.5 million, which were contributed to one of our pension plans to satisfy the funding requirement for 2014.$506.5 million. Interest on the Senior Notes is payable on May 1 February 15 and November 1 August 15 of each year, commencing November 1, 2013. See Note 9 for more information.August 15, 2020.

Other Commitments

Our contractual obligations as of September30, 20172020 included approximately $0.5$0.7 million for various costs. In addition, our open purchase orders at September 30, 20172020 included approximately $0.3$3.2 million, $1.9$0.4 million, $5.6 million and $20.9$3.3 million for various capital and non-capital items at the Lucky Friday, Casa Berardi, and Greens Creek and Nevada Operations units, respectively. We also have total commitments of approximately $14.1$15.0 million relating to scheduled payments on capitalfinance leases, including interest, primarily for equipment at our Greens Creek, Lucky Friday, and Casa Berardi and Nevada Operations units, and total commitments of approximately $13.6 million relating to payments on operating leases (see Note 9 for more information). As part of our ongoing business and operations, we are required to provide surety bonds, bank letters of credit, and restricted deposits for various purposes, including financial support for environmental reclamation obligations and workers compensation programs. As of September 30, 2017,2020, we had surety bonds totaling $117.4$182.6 million and letters of credit totaling $20.3 million in place as financial support for future reclamation and closure costs, self-insurance, and employee benefit plans. The obligations associated with these instruments are generally related to performance requirements that we address through ongoing operations. As the requirements are met, the beneficiary of the associated instruments cancels or returns the instrument to the issuing entity. Certain of these instruments are associated with operating sites with long-lived assets and will remain outstanding until closure of the sites. We believe we are in compliance with all applicable bonding requirements and will be able to satisfy future bonding requirements as they arise.

Other Contingencies

We also have certain other contingencies resulting from litigation, claims, EPA investigations, and other commitments and are subject to a variety of environmental and safety laws and regulations incident to the ordinary course of business. We currently expecthave no basis to conclude that the resolutionany or all of such contingencies will not materially affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows. However, in the future, there may be changes to these contingencies, or additional contingencies may occur, any of which might result in an accrual or a change in current accruals recorded by us, and there can be no assurance that their ultimate disposition will not have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.

Note 5.    Earnings    Income (Loss) Per Common Share

We are authorized to issue 750,000,000 shares of common stock, $0.25 par value per share. At September30, 2017,2020, there were 403,548,158537,655,291 shares of our common stock issued and 4,529,450with 6,821,044 of those shares issued and held in treasury, for a net of 399,018,708530,834,247 shares outstanding. Basic and diluted income (loss) per common share, after preferred dividends, was $0.00$0.03 and $0.01$(0.04) for the three- and nine-monththree-month periods ended September 30, 2017,2020 and 2019, respectively. Basic and diluted incomeloss per common share, after preferred dividends, was $0.07$(0.03) and $0.13$(0.19) for the three- and nine-monthnine-month periods ended September 30, 2016,2020 and 2019, respectively.

Diluted income (loss) per share for the three and nine months ended September30, 20172020 and 20162019 excludes the potential effects of outstanding shares of our convertible preferred stock, as their conversion would have no effect on the calculation of dilutive shares.

For the three-month and nine-month periodsthree-month period ended September30, 2017, 3,591,6972020, the calculation of diluted income per common share included (i) 2,499,956 restricted stock units that were unvested or which vested induring the current period, (ii) 1,454,246 warrants to purchase one share of common stock and 1,509,159(iii) 1,996,112 deferred shares that were included indilutive. For the three-month period ended September 30,2019 and nine-month periods ended September 30,2020 and 2019, all restricted share units, deferred shares and warrants were excluded from the computation of diluted loss per share, as our reported loss for those periods would cause their conversion and exercise to have no effect on the calculation of diluted incomeloss per share. For the three-month and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2016, 4,309,440 restricted stock units that were unvested or which vested in the current period and 635,602 deferred shares were included in the calculation of diluted income per share. There were no options or warrants outstanding as of September 30, 2017 or September 30, 2016.