Commitments and Contingencies | Commitments and Contingencies In the ordinary course of our business, we are subject to claims and administrative proceedings, none of which we believe are material or would be expected to have, individually or in the aggregate, a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations. Windstream Commitments Following the consummation of our settlement agreement with Windstream, including entry into the Windstream Leases, we are obligated to make $490.1 million of cash payments to Windstream in equal installments over 20 consecutive quarters beginning in October 2020, and Uniti may prepay any installments due on or after the first anniversary of the settlement agreement (discounted at a 9% rate). On October 14, 2021, the Company prepaid four installments for a total of $92.9 million. As of September 30, 2022, the Company has made payments totaling $215.4 million. Further, we are obligated to reimburse Windstream for up to an aggregate of $1.75 billion for certain growth capital improvements in long-term fiber and related assets made by Windstream (“Growth Capital Improvements”) through 2029. Uniti’s reimbursement commitment for Growth Capital Improvements does not require Uniti to reimburse Windstream for maintenance or repair expenditures (except for costs incurred for fiber replacements to the property leased under the competitive local exchange carrier master lease agreement, up to $70 million during the term), and each such reimbursement is subject to underwriting standards. Uniti’s total annual reimbursement commitments for the Growth Capital Improvements under both Windstream Leases (and under separate equipment loan facilities) were limited to $125 million in 2020, $225 million in 2021, and are limited to $225 million per year in 2022 through 2024; $175 million per year in 2025 and 2026; and $125 million per year in 2027 through 2029. If the cost incurred by Windstream (or the successor tenant under a Windstream Lease) for Growth Capital Improvements in any calendar year exceeds the annual limit for such calendar year, Windstream (or such tenant, as the case may be) may submit such excess costs for reimbursement in any subsequent year and such excess costs shall be funded from the annual commitment amounts in such subsequent period. In addition, to the extent that reimbursements for Growth Capital Improvements funded in any calendar year during the term is less than the annual limit for such calendar year, the unfunded amount in any calendar year will carry-over and may be added to the annual limits for subsequent calendar years, subject to an annual limit of $250 million in any calendar year. During the nine months ended September 30, 2022, Uniti reimbursed $158.1 million of Growth Capital Improvements, of which $30.6 million represented the reimbursement of capital improvements completed in 2021 that were previously classified as tenant funded capital improvements. Upon reimbursement, the Company reduced the unamortized portion of deferred revenue related to these capital improvements and capitalized the difference between the cash provided to Windstream and the unamortized deferred revenue as a lease incentive. This lease incentive, which is $0.8 million and reported within other assets on our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2022, will be amortized as a reduction to revenue over the initial term of the Windstream Leases. Starting on the first anniversary of each installment of reimbursement for a Growth Capital Improvement, the rent payable by Windstream under the applicable Windstream Lease will increase by an amount equal to 8.0% (the “Rent Rate”) of such installment of reimbursement. The Rent Rate will thereafter increase to 100.5% of the prior Rent Rate on each anniversary of each reimbursement. In the event that the tenant’s interest in either Windstream Lease is transferred by Windstream under the terms thereof (unless transferred to the same transferee), or if Uniti transfers its interests as landlord under either Windstream Lease (unless to the same transferee), the reimbursement rights and obligations will be allocated between the ILEC MLA and the CLEC MLA by Windstream, provided that the maximum that may be allocated to the CLEC MLA following such transfer is $20 million per year. If Uniti fails to reimburse any Growth Capital Improvement reimbursement payment or equipment loan funding request as and when it is required to do so under the terms of the Windstream Leases, and such failure continues for thirty (30) days, then such unreimbursed amounts may be applied as an offset against the rent owed by Windstream under the Windstream Leases (and such amounts will thereafter be treated as if Uniti had reimbursed them). Uniti and Windstream have entered into separate ILEC and CLEC Equipment Loan and Security Agreements (collectively “Equipment Loan Agreement”) in which Uniti will provide up to $125 million (limited to $25 million in any calendar year) of the $1.75 billion of Growth Capital Improvements commitments discussed above in the form of loans for Windstream to purchase equipment related to network upgrades or to be used in connection with the Windstream Leases. Interest on these loans will accrue at 8% from the date of the borrowing. All equipment financed through the Equipment Loan Agreement is the sole property of Windstream; however, Uniti will receive a first-lien security interest in the equipment purchased with the loans. Other Litigation On July 3, 2019, SLF Holdings, LLC (“SLF”) filed a complaint against the Company, Uniti Fiber, and certain current and former officers of the Company (collectively, the “Defendants”) in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, in connection with Uniti Fiber’s purchase of Southern Light, LLC from SLF in July 2017. The complaint asserted claims for fraud and conspiracy, as well as claims under federal and Alabama securities laws, alleging that Defendants improperly failed to disclose to SLF the risk that the Spin-Off and entry into the Master Lease violated certain debt covenants of Windstream. On September 26, 2019, the action was transferred to United States District Court for the District of Delaware. On November 18, 2019, SLF filed an amended complaint, adding allegations that Defendants also failed to fully disclose the risk that the Master Lease purportedly could be recharacterized as a financing instead of a “true lease.” The amended complaint sought compensatory and punitive damages, as well as reformation of the purchase agreement for the sale. On December 18, 2019, Defendants moved to dismiss the amended complaint in its entirety. On November 4, 2020, the court granted the Defendants’ motion and dismissed SLF’s amended complaint, in its entirety, with prejudice. On December 1, 2020, SLF filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit from the district court’s dismissal order. On August 17, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied SLF's appeal. We have evaluated this matter under the guidance provided by ASC 450, Contingencies (“ASC 450”), and as of the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, we consider a loss not to be probable and are unable to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss; therefore, we have not recorded any liabilities associated with these claims in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. Beginning on October 25, 2019, several purported shareholders filed separate putative class actions in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas against the Company and certain of our officers, alleging violations of the federal securities laws based on claims similar to those asserted in the SLF Action. On March 12, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas consolidated the Shareholder Actions and appointed lead plaintiffs and lead counsel in the consolidated cases under the caption In re Uniti Group Inc. Securities Litigation (the “Class Action”). On May 11, 2020, lead plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint in the Class Action. The consolidated amended complaint seeks to represent investors who acquired the Company’s securities between April 20, 2015 and February 15, 2019. The Class Action asserts claims under Sections 10(b) and 20(a) of the Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5 promulgated thereunder, alleging that the Company made materially false and misleading statements by allegedly failing to disclose, among other things, the risk that the Spin-Off and entry into the Master Lease violated certain debt covenants of Windstream and/or the risk that the Master Lease purportedly could be recharacterized as a financing instead of a “true lease.” The Class Action seeks class certification, unspecified monetary damages, costs and attorneys’ fees and other relief. On July 10, 2020, defendants moved to dismiss the consolidated amended complaint. On April 1, 2021, the court issued an order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss. On April 15, 2021, defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of the order or, in the alternative, for certification of an appeal of the decision to the Eighth Circuit. On October 25, 2021, plaintiffs filed a motion for class certification, which defendants opposed . On December 22, 2021, the court issued an order denying defendants’ motion for reconsideration or, in the alternative, certification of an appeal. On March 25, 2022, the parties reached an agreement to settle the Class Action, on behalf of a settlement class, for $38.9 million, to be funded entirely by the Company’s insurance carriers. On June 17, 2022, the parties signed a stipulation of settlement and plaintiffs moved for preliminary approval of the settlement. The court granted preliminary approval on July 20, 2022. The settlement remains subject to final court approval. In accordance with ASC 450, we recorded $38.9 million of settlement expense within general and administrative expense within our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income during the first quarter of 2022 and accounts payable, accrued expenses and other liabilities, net within our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2022. Additionally, we recorded the probable insurance recovery of $38.9 million as a reduction to general and administrative expense during the first quarter of 2022 within our Condensed Consolidated Statements of Income, and other assets within Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2022. On August 17, 2021, two purported shareholders filed a derivative action on behalf of Uniti in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Maryland, under the caption Mayer et al. v. Gunderman et al. , 24-C-21-003488 (the “Mayer Derivative Action”). The Mayer Derivative Action names Kenneth Gunderman and Mark Wallace as defendants and the Company as a nominal defendant and asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment. The complaint alleges that the individual defendants caused the Company to issue certain false and misleading statements relating to the Spin-Off and/or the Master Lease. In particular, as in the Shareholder Actions, the complaint alleges, among other things, that defendants failed to disclose the risk that the Spin-Off and entry into the Master Lease violated certain debt covenants of Windstream and/or the risk that the Master Lease purportedly could be recharacterized as a financing instead of a “true lease.” The complaint seeks unspecified damages, unspecified equitable relief, and related costs and fees. On December 23, 2021, the court entered a joint stipulation to stay the Mayer Derivative Action, including the time for the defendants to respond to the complaint, pending the outcome of the Class Action. Because this matter is still in its preliminary stages, we have not yet determined what effect this lawsuit will have, if any, on our financial position or results of operations. We have evaluated this matter under the guidance provided by ASC 450, and as of the date of this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, we consider a loss not to be probable and are unable to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss; therefore, we have not recorded any liabilities associated with these claims in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. On February 11, 2022, a purported shareholder filed a derivative action on behalf of Uniti in the federal District Court for the District of Maryland, under the caption Guzzo et al. v. Gunderman et al. , 1:22-cv-00366-GLR (the “Guzzo Derivative Action”). The complaint names Kenneth Gunderman, Mark Wallace, Francis Frantz, David Solomon, Jennifer Banner, and Scott Bruce as defendants and the Company as a nominal defendant and asserts claims for contribution against Gunderman and Wallace if the Company is found to be liable for violations of the federal securities laws in the Class Action and claims against all the individual defendants for breaches of fiduciary duty, waste of corporate assets, and unjust enrichment. The allegations in the Guzzo Derivative Action are similar to those in the Mayer Derivative Action and the Class Action. The complaint seeks unspecified damages, equitable relief, and related costs and fees. On March 16, 2022, the court entered a joint stipulation to stay the Guzzo Derivative Action, including the time for the defendants to respond to the complaint, pending the outcome of the Class Action. We intend to defend this matter vigorously, and, because it is still in its relatively early stages, we have not yet determined what effect this lawsuit will have, if any, on our financial position or results of operations. We maintain insurance policies that would provide coverage to various degrees for potential liabilities arising from the legal proceedings described above. Under t he terms of the tax matters agreement entered into on April 24, 2015 by the Company, Windstream Services, LLC and Windstream (the “Tax Matters Agreement”), in connection with the Spin-Off, we are generally responsible for any taxes imposed on Windstream that arise from the failure of the Spin-Off and the debt exchanges to qualify as tax-free for U.S. federal income tax purposes, within the meaning of Section 355 and Section 368(a)(1)(D) of the Code, as applicable, to the extent such failure to qualify is attributable to certain actions, events or transactions relating to our stock, indebtedness, assets or business, or a breach of the relevant representations or any covenants made by us in the Tax Matters Agreement, the materials submitted to the IRS in connection with the request for the private letter ruling or the representations provided in connection with the tax opinion. We believe that the probability of us incurring obligations under the Tax Matters Agreement are remote; and therefore, we have recorded no such liabilities in our Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as of September 30, 2022. |