OTHER | NOTE 9 – OTHER Changes in Estimates Accounting for contracts using the percentage-of-completion inception-to-date Many of our contracts span several years and include highly complex technical requirements. At the outset of a contract, we identify and monitor risks to the achievement of the technical, schedule and cost aspects of the contract and assess the effects of those risks on our estimates of total costs to complete the contract. The estimates consider the technical requirements (e.g., a newly-developed product versus a mature product), the schedule and associated tasks (e.g., the number and type of milestone events) and costs (e.g., material, labor, subcontractor, overhead and the estimated costs to fulfill our industrial cooperation agreements, sometimes referred to as offset agreements, required under certain contracts with international customers). The initial profit booking rate of each contract considers risks surrounding the ability to achieve the technical requirements, schedule and costs in the initial estimated total costs to complete the contract. Profit booking rates may increase during the performance of the contract if we successfully retire risks surrounding the technical, schedule and cost aspects of the contract, which decreases the estimated total costs to complete the contract. Conversely, our profit booking rates may decrease if the estimated total costs to complete the contract increase. All of the estimates are subject to change during the performance of the contract and may affect the profit booking rate. Comparability of our segment sales, operating profit and operating margin may be impacted favorably or unfavorably by changes in profit booking rates on our contracts accounted for using the percentage-of-completion inception-to-date As previously disclosed, we have a program to design, integrate, and install an air missile defense command, control, communications, computers – intelligence (C4I) systems for an international customer that has experienced performance matters and for which we have periodically accrued reserves. During the quarter ended March 26, 2017, we revised our estimated costs to complete the program, EADGE-T, Our consolidated net adjustments not related to volume, including net profit booking rate adjustments and other matters, net of state income taxes, increased segment operating profit by approximately $290 million and $360 million in the quarters ended March 26, 2017 and March 27, 2016, respectively. These adjustments increased net earnings by approximately $189 million ($0.65 per share) and $234 million ($0.76 per share) in the quarters ended March 26, 2017 and March 27, 2016, respectively. Restructuring Charges During the quarter ended March 27, 2016, we recorded severance charges totaling approximately $80 million related to our Aeronautics business segment. The charges consisted of severance costs associated with the planned elimination of certain positions through either voluntary or involuntary actions. Upon separation, terminated employees received lump-sum Equity Method Investee Impairment During the quarter ended March 26, 2017, equity earnings included our portion of a noncash asset impairment charge related to certain long-lived assets held by an international equity method investee of approximately $64 million ($40 million or $0.14 per share, after tax), which was recorded at our corporate office. We are continuing to monitor our investment in this equity method investee. It is possible that we may have to record our portion of additional charges should their business continue to experience performance issues, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Income Taxes Our effective income tax rates were 23.3% and 18.9% during the quarters ended March 26, 2017 and March 27, 2016, respectively. The rates for both periods benefited from tax deductions for U.S. manufacturing activities, dividends paid to our defined contribution plans with an employee stock ownership plan feature, tax benefits of employee equity awards, and the research and development tax credit. The tax benefits of employee equity awards reduced our effective tax rate for the quarters ended March 26, 2017 and March 27, 2016 by 6.2 and 10.4 percentage points, respectively. Stockholders’ Equity Repurchases of Common Stock During the quarter ended March 26, 2017, we repurchased 1.9 million shares of our common stock for $500 million. The total remaining authorization for future common share repurchases under our share repurchase program was $3.0 billion as of March 26, 2017. As we repurchase our common shares, we reduce common stock for the $1 of par value of the shares repurchased, with the excess purchase price over par value recorded as a reduction of additional paid-in paid-in paid-in Dividends We declared cash dividends totaling $531 million ($1.82 per share) and $512 million ($1.65 per share) during the quarters ended March 26, 2017 and March 27, 2016, respectively. Dividends paid during the quarters ended March 26, 2017 and March 27, 2016 are higher than dividends declared due to dividends paid to holders of restricted stock units (RSUs) upon vesting of the RSU. These dividends are accrued through the RSU vesting period and are paid upon the vesting of the RSU. Restricted Stock Unit Grants During the quarter ended March 26, 2017, we granted certain employees approximately 0.5 million RSUs with a grant-date fair value of $254.53 per RSU. The grant-date fair value of these RSUs is equal to the closing market price of our common stock on the grant date less a discount to reflect the delay in payment of dividend-equivalent cash payments that are made only upon vesting, which is generally three years from the grant date. We recognize the grant-date fair value of RSUs, less estimated forfeitures, as compensation expense ratably over the requisite service period, which is shorter than the vesting period if the employee is retirement eligible on the date of grant or will become retirement eligible before the end of the vesting period. Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss Changes in the balance of AOCL, net of tax, consisted of the following (in millions): Postretirement Other, net AOCL Balance at December 31, 2016 $ (11,981) $ (121) $ (12,102) Other comprehensive income before reclassifications 3 4 7 Amounts reclassified from AOCL Recognition of net actuarial losses (a) 258 — 258 Amortization of net prior service credits (a) (56) — (56) Other — 1 1 Total reclassified from AOCL 202 1 203 Total other comprehensive income 205 5 210 Balance at March 26, 2017 $ (11,776) $ (116) $ (11,892) Balance at December 31, 2015 $ (11,314) $ (130) $ (11,444) Other comprehensive income before reclassifications — 15 15 Amounts reclassified from AOCL Recognition of net actuarial losses (a) 234 — 234 Amortization of net prior service credits (a) (61) — (61) Other — 2 2 Total reclassified from AOCL 173 2 175 Total other comprehensive income 173 17 190 Balance at March 27, 2016 $ (11,141) $ (113) $ (11,254) (a) Reclassifications from AOCL related to our postretirement benefit plans were recorded as a component of net periodic benefit cost for each period presented (see “Note 6 – Postretirement Plans”). Recent Accounting Pronouncements In May 2014, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, (Topic 606) one-year As the ASU will supersede substantially all existing revenue guidance affecting us under GAAP, it could impact revenue and cost recognition on thousands of contracts across all of our business segments, as well as our business processes and our information technology systems. As a result, our evaluation of the effect of the ASU will extend through 2017. We have closely monitored the standard setting process, including amendments and technical corrections to the ASU following its issuance in May 2014 and participated in aerospace and defense forums to understand the impact of the ASU on our industry. We commenced our evaluation of the impact of the ASU in late 2014, by evaluating its impact on selected contracts at each of our business segments. With this baseline understanding, we developed a project plan to evaluate thousands of contracts across our business segments, develop processes and tools to dual report financial results under both GAAP and the ASU and assess the internal control structure in order to adopt the ASU on January 1, 2018. We have periodically briefed our Audit Committee on our progress made towards adoption. Based on our evaluation to date, we anticipate being able to estimate the impacts of adopting the ASU in the second half of 2017. We recognize the majority of our revenue using the percentage-of-completion percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost F-35 percentage-of-completion units-of-delivery C-130J C-5 PAC-3 ® ® percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost Under the ASU, revenue will be recognized as the customer obtains control of the goods and services promised in the contract (i.e., performance obligations). Given the nature of our products and terms and conditions in our contracts, in particular those with the U. S. Government (including foreign military sales (FMS) contracts), the customer obtains control as we perform work under the contract. Therefore, we expect to recognize revenue over time for almost all of our contracts using a method similar to our current percentage-of-completion cost-to-cost percentage-of-completion units-of-delivery units-of-delivery cost-to-cost In March 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-07, Compensation-Retirement Benefits (Topic 715) In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) |