Attached files

file filename
EX-32 - EXHIBIT 32 - ASTRONICS CORPatro-20161231xex32.htm
EX-31.2 - EXHIBIT 31.2 - ASTRONICS CORPatro-20161231xex312.htm
EX-31.1 - EXHIBIT 31.1 - ASTRONICS CORPatro-20161231xex311.htm
EX-23 - EXHIBIT 23 - ASTRONICS CORPatro-20161231xex23.htm
EX-21 - EXHIBIT 21 - ASTRONICS CORPatro-20161231xex21.htm

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
 ___________________________________________________________
Form 10-K
___________________________________________________________
x
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2016
Commission File Number 0-7087
___________________________________________________________ 
Astronics Corporation
(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)
 ___________________________________________________________
New York
 
16-0959303
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
 
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
130 Commerce Way, East Aurora, N.Y. 14052
(Address of principal executive office)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (716) 805-1599
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
$.01 par value Common Stock; $.01 par value Class B Stock
(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  x
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x
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  x    No  ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  x    No  ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of the registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer”, an “accelerated filer”, a “non-accelerated filer” and a “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer
x
Accelerated filer
¨
 
 
 
 
Non-accelerated filer
¨
Smaller Reporting Company
¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x
As of February 17, 2017, 29,097,719 shares were outstanding, consisting of 21,691,969 shares of Common Stock $.01 par value and 7,405,750 shares of Class B Stock $.01 par value. The aggregate market value, as of the last business day of the Company’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, of the shares of Common Stock and Class B Stock of Astronics Corporation held by non-affiliates was approximately $707,000,000 (assuming conversion of all of the outstanding Class B Stock into Common Stock and assuming the affiliates of the Registrant to be its directors, executive officers and persons known to the Registrant to beneficially own more than 10% of the outstanding capital stock of the Corporation).
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 31, 2017 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Report.

1


Table of Contents
ASTRONICS CORPORATION
Index to Annual Report
on Form 10-K
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
 
 
Page
 
 
Item 1.
Item 1A.
Item 1B.
Item 2.
Item 3.
Item 4.
 
 
 
 
 
Item 5.
Item 6.
Item 7.
Item 7A.
Item 8.
Item 9.
Item 9A.
Item 9B.
 
 
 
 
 
Item 10.
Item 11.
Item 12.
Item 13.
Item 14.
 
 
 
 
 
Item 15.
Item 16.


2


FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS
Information included or incorporated by reference in this report that does not consist of historical facts, including statements accompanied by or containing words such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “believes,” “expects,” “expected,” “intends,” “plans,” “projects,” “approximate,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” “outlook,” “forecast,” “anticipates,” “presume” and “assume,” are forward-looking statements. Such forward-looking statements are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are not guarantees of future performance and are subject to several factors, risks and uncertainties, the impact or occurrence of which could cause actual results to differ materially from the expected results described in the forward-looking statements. Certain of these factors, risks and uncertainties are discussed in the sections of this report entitled “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” New factors, risks and uncertainties may emerge from time to time that may affect the forward-looking statements made herein. Given these factors, risks and uncertainties, investors should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as predictive of future results. We disclaim any obligation to update the forward-looking statements made in this report.


3


PART I
ITEM 1.    BUSINESS
Astronics Corporation (“Astronics” or the “Company”) is a leading supplier of products to the global aerospace, defense, electronics and semiconductor industries. Our products and services include advanced, high-performance electrical power generation, distribution and motion systems, lighting & safety systems, avionics products, aircraft structures, systems certification and automated test systems.
We have operations in the United States (“U.S.”), Canada and France. We design and build our products through our wholly owned subsidiaries Astronics Advanced Electronic Systems Corp. (“AES”); Astronics AeroSat Corporation (“AeroSat”); Armstrong Aerospace, Inc. (“Armstrong”); Astronics Test Systems, Inc. (“ATS”); Ballard Technology, Inc. (“Ballard”); Astronics DME LLC (“DME”); Luminescent Systems, Inc. (“LSI”); Luminescent Systems Canada, Inc. (“LSI Canada”); Max-Viz, Inc. (“Max-Viz”); Peco, Inc. (“Peco”); and PGA Electronic s.a. (“PGA”).
Acquisitions
On February 28, 2014, Astronics acquired, through its wholly-owned subsidiary ATS, certain assets and liabilities of EADS North America’s Test and Services division, located in Irvine, California. ATS is a leading provider of highly engineered automatic test systems, subsystems and instruments for semiconductor and consumer electronics products to both the commercial and defense industries. ATS is included in our Test Systems segment.
On January 14, 2015, the Company acquired all of the outstanding stock of Armstrong, located in Itasca, Illinois. Armstrong is a leading provider of engineering, design and certification solutions for commercial aircraft, specializing in connectivity, in-flight entertainment, and electrical power systems. Armstrong is included in our Aerospace segment.
Products and Customers
Our Aerospace segment designs and manufactures products for the global aerospace industry. Product lines include lighting and safety systems, electrical power generation, distribution and motions systems, aircraft structures, avionics products, systems certification and other products. Our Aerospace customers are the airframe manufacturers (“OEM”) that build aircraft for the commercial, military and general aviation markets, suppliers to those OEM’s, aircraft operators such as airlines and branches of the U.S. Department of Defense as well as the Federal Aviation Administration and airport operators. During 2016, this segment’s sales were divided 82% to the commercial transport market, 10% to the military aircraft market, 5% to the business jet market and 3% to other markets. Most of this segment’s sales are a result of contracts or purchase orders received from customers, placed on a day-to-day basis or for single year procurements rather than long-term multi-year contract commitments. On occasion, the Company does receive contractual commitments or blanket purchase orders from our customers covering multiple-year deliveries of hardware to our customers.
Our Test Systems segment designs, develops, manufactures and maintains automated test systems that support the semiconductor, aerospace, communications and weapons test systems as well as training and simulation devices for both commercial and military applications. In the Test Systems segment, Astronics’ products are sold to a global customer base including OEMs and prime government contractors for both electronics and military products. During 2016, this segment’s sales were divided 38% to the semiconductor market and 62% to the aerospace & defense market. Before the acquisition of ATS in February 2014, this segment’s sales were all to the military market.
Sales by segment, geographic region, major customer and foreign operations are provided in Note 17 of Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data in this report.
We have a significant concentration of business with two major customers; Panasonic Avionics Corporation (“Panasonic”) and The Boeing Company (“Boeing”). Sales to Panasonic accounted for 21.6% of sales in 2016, 21.0% of sales in 2015, and 17.7% of sales in 2014. Sales to Boeing accounted for 15.2% of sales in 2016, 13.0% of sales in 2015, and 14.1% of sales in 2014.
Strategy
Our strategy is to increase our value by developing technologies and capabilities either internally or through acquisition, and using those capabilities to provide innovative solutions to the aerospace & defense, semiconductor and other markets where our technology can be beneficial.

4


Practices as to Maintaining Working Capital
Liquidity is discussed in Part II, Item 7, Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, in the Liquidity and Capital Resources section of this report.
Competitive Conditions
We experience considerable competition in the market sectors we serve, principally with respect to product performance and price, from various competitors, many of which are substantially larger and have greater resources. Success in the markets we serve depends upon product innovation, customer support, responsiveness and cost management. We continue to invest in developing the technologies and engineering support critical to competing in our markets.
Government Contracts
All U.S. government contracts, including subcontracts where the U.S. government is the ultimate customer, may be subject to termination at the election of the government. Our revenue stream relies on military spending. Approximately 18% of our consolidated sales were made to the military aircraft and military test systems markets combined.
Raw Materials
Materials, supplies and components are purchased from numerous sources. We believe that the loss of any one source, although potentially disruptive in the short-term, would not materially affect our operations in the long-term.
Seasonality
Our business is typically not seasonal.
Backlog
At December 31, 2016, our backlog was $258.0 million. At December 31, 2015, our backlog was $274.4 million. Backlog in the Aerospace segment was $219.1 million at December 31, 2016, of which $197.8 million is expected to be realized in 2017. Backlog in the Test Systems segment was $38.9 million at December 31, 2016, of which $32.6 million is expected to be realized in 2017.
Patents
We have a number of patents. While the aggregate protection of these patents is of value, our only material business that is dependent upon the protection afforded by these patents is our cabin power distribution products. Our patents and patent applications relate to electroluminescence, instrument panels, keyboard technology and a broad patent covering the cabin power distribution technology. We regard our expertise and techniques as proprietary and rely upon trade secret laws and contractual arrangements to protect our rights. We have trademark protection in our major markets.
Research, Development and Engineering Activities
We are engaged in a variety of engineering and design activities as well as basic research and development activities directed to the substantial improvement or new application of our existing technologies. These costs are expensed when incurred and included in cost of sales. Research, development and engineering costs amounted to approximately $90.2 million in 2016, $90.1 million in 2015 and $76.7 million in 2014.
Employees
We employed approximately 2,300 employees at December 31, 2016. We consider our relations with our employees to be good. We have approximately 200 hourly production employees at Peco who are subject to collective bargaining agreements.
Stock Distribution
On September 26, 2016, the Company announced a three-for-twenty distribution of Class B Stock to holders of both Common and Class B Stock. Stockholders received three shares of Class B Stock for every twenty shares of Common and Class B Stock

5


held on the record date of October 11, 2016. Fractional shares were paid in cash. All share quantities, share prices and per share data reported throughout this report have been adjusted to reflect the impact of this distribution.
Available information
We file our financial information and other materials as electronically required with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). These materials can be accessed electronically via the Internet at www.sec.gov. Such materials and other information about the Company are also available through our website at www.astronics.com.
ITEM 1A.    RISK FACTORS
The loss of Panasonic or Boeing as major customers or a significant reduction in sales to either of those customers would reduce our sales and earnings. In 2016, we had a concentration of sales to Panasonic and Boeing representing approximately 21.6% and 15.2% of our sales, respectively. The loss of either of these customers or a significant reduction in sales to them would significantly reduce our sales and earnings.
The amount of debt we have outstanding, as well as any debt we may incur in the future, could have an adverse effect on our operational and financial flexibility. As of December 31, 2016, we had approximately $148.1 million of debt outstanding, of which $145.5 million is long-term debt. Changes to our level of debt subsequent to December 31, 2016 could have significant consequences to our business, including the following:
 
Depending on interest rates and debt maturities, a substantial portion of our cash flow from operations could be dedicated to paying principal and interest on our debt, thereby reducing funds available for our acquisition strategy, capital expenditures or other purposes;
A significant amount of debt could make us more vulnerable to changes in economic conditions or increases in prevailing interest rates;
Our ability to obtain additional financing for acquisitions, capital expenditures or for other purposes could be impaired;
The increase in the amount of debt we have outstanding increases the risk of non-compliance with some of the covenants in our debt agreements which require us to maintain specified financial ratios; and
We may be more leveraged than some of our competitors, which may result in a competitive disadvantage.
We are subject to debt covenant restrictions. Our credit facility contains several financial and other restrictive covenants. A significant decline in our operating income could cause us to violate our covenants. A covenant violation would require a waiver by the lenders or an alternative financing arrangement be achieved. This could result in our being unable to borrow under our bank credit facility or being obliged to refinance and renegotiate the terms of our bank indebtedness. Historically both choices have been available to us, however, it is difficult to predict the availability of these options in the future.
Our future operating results could be impacted by estimates used to calculate impairment losses on long term assets. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make significant and subjective estimates and assumptions that may affect the reported amounts of long term assets in the financial statements. These estimates are integral in the determination of whether a potential impairment loss exists as well as the calculation of that loss. Actual future results could differ from those estimates.
A write-off of all or part of our goodwill or other intangible assets could adversely affect our operating results and net worth. At December 31, 2016, goodwill and purchased intangible assets were approximately 35.3% and 36.7% of our total assets, respectively. Our goodwill and other intangible assets may increase in the future since our strategy includes growing through acquisitions. We may have to write-off all or part of our goodwill or purchased intangible assets if their value becomes impaired. Although this write-off would be a non-cash charge, it could reduce our earnings and net worth significantly.
The markets we serve are cyclical and sensitive to domestic and foreign economic conditions and events, which may cause our operating results to fluctuate. Demand for our products is to a large extent dependent on the demand and success of our customers' products where we are a supplier to an OEM. In our Aerospace segment, demand by the business jet markets for our products is dependent upon several factors, including capital investment, product innovations, economic growth and wealth creation and technology upgrades. In addition, the commercial airline industry is highly cyclical and sensitive to fuel price increases, labor disputes, global economic conditions, availability of capital to fund new aircraft purchases and upgrades

6


of existing aircraft and passenger demand. A change in any of these factors could result in a reduction in the amount of air travel and the ability of airlines to invest in new aircraft or to upgrade existing aircraft. These factors would reduce orders for new aircraft and would likely reduce airlines’ spending for cabin upgrades for which we supply products, thus reducing our sales and profits. A reduction in air travel may also result in our commercial airline customers being unable to pay our invoices on a timely basis or not at all.
We are a supplier on various new aircraft programs just entering or expected to begin production in the future. As with any new program, there is risk as to whether the aircraft or program will be successful and accepted by the market. As is customary for our business, we purchase inventory and invest in specific capital equipment to support our production requirements generally based on delivery schedules provided by our customer. If a program or aircraft is not successful we may have to write-off all or a part of the inventory, accounts receivable and capital equipment related to the program. A write-off of these assets could result in a significant reduction of earnings and cause covenant violations relating to our debt agreements. This could result in our being unable to borrow additional funds under our bank credit facility or being obliged to refinance or renegotiate the terms of our bank indebtedness.
In our Test Systems segment, the market for our products is concentrated with a limited number of significant customers accounting for a substantial portion of the purchases of test equipment. In any one reporting period, a single customer or several customers may contribute an even larger percentage of our consolidated revenues. In addition, our ability to increase sales will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain orders from current or new significant customers. The opportunities to obtain orders from these customers may be limited, which may impair our ability to grow revenues. We expect that sales of our Test Systems products will continue to be concentrated with a limited number of significant customers for the foreseeable future. Additionally, demand for some of our test products is dependent upon government funding levels for our products, our ability to compete successfully for those contracts and our ability to develop products to satisfy the demands of our customers.
Our products are sold in highly competitive markets. Some of our competitors are larger, more diversified corporations and have greater financial, marketing, production and research and development resources. As a result, they may be better able to withstand the effects of periodic economic downturns. Our operations and financial performance will be negatively impacted if our competitors:
 
develop products that are superior to our products;
develop products that are more competitively priced than our products;
develop methods of more efficiently and effectively providing products and services; or
adapt more quickly than we do to new technologies or evolving customer requirements.
We believe that the principal points of competition in our markets are product quality, price, design and engineering capabilities, product development, conformity to customer specifications, quality of support after the sale, timeliness of delivery and effectiveness of the distribution organization. Maintaining and improving our competitive position will require continued investment in manufacturing, engineering, quality standards, marketing, customer service and support and our distribution networks. If we do not maintain sufficient resources to make these investments, or are not successful in maintaining our competitive position, our operations and financial performance will suffer.
Our future success depends to a significant degree upon the continued contributions of our management team and technical personnel. The loss of members of our management team could have a material and adverse effect on our business. In addition, competition for qualified technical personnel in our industry is intense, and we believe that our future growth and success will depend on our ability to attract, train and retain such personnel.
Future terror attacks, war, or other civil disturbances could negatively impact our business. Continued terror attacks, war or other disturbances could lead to economic instability and decreases in demand for our products, which could negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. Terrorist attacks world-wide have caused instability from time to time in global financial markets and the aviation industry. The long-term effects of terrorist attacks on us are unknown. These attacks and the U.S. government’s continued efforts against terrorist organizations may lead to additional armed hostilities or to further acts of terrorism and civil disturbance in the U.S. or elsewhere, which may further contribute to economic instability.
Our business operations may be adversely affected by information systems interruptions or intrusions. We are dependent on various information technologies throughout our Company to administer, store and support multiple business activities. Disruptions or cyber security attacks such as unauthorized access, malicious software and other intrusions may lead to exposure

7


of proprietary and confidential information as well as potential data corruption. Any intrusion may cause operational stoppages, diminished competitive advantages through reputational damages and increased operational costs.
Our inability to adequately enforce and protect our intellectual property or defend against assertions of infringement could prevent or restrict our ability to compete. We rely on patents, trademarks and proprietary knowledge and technology, both internally developed and acquired, in order to maintain a competitive advantage. Our inability to defend against the unauthorized use of these rights and assets could have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Litigation may be necessary to protect our intellectual property rights or defend against claims of infringement. This litigation could result in significant costs and divert our management’s focus away from operations.
If we are unable to adapt to technological change, demand for our products may be reduced. The technologies related to our products have undergone, and in the future may undergo, significant changes. To succeed in the future, we will need to continue to design, develop, manufacture, assemble, test, market and support new products and enhancements on a timely and cost effective basis. Our competitors may develop technologies and products that are more effective than those we develop or that render our technology and products obsolete or uncompetitive. Furthermore, our products could become unmarketable if new industry standards emerge. We may have to modify our products significantly in the future to remain competitive, and new products we introduce may not be accepted by our customers.
Our new product development efforts may not be successful, which would result in a reduction in our sales and earnings. We may experience difficulties that could delay or prevent the successful development of new products or product enhancements, and new products or product enhancements may not be accepted by our customers. In addition, the development expenses we incur may exceed our cost estimates, and new products we develop may not generate sales sufficient to offset our costs. If any of these events occur, our sales and profits could be adversely affected.
We depend on government contracts and subcontracts with defense prime contractors and sub-contractors that may not be fully funded, may be terminated, or may be awarded to our competitors. The failure to be awarded these contracts, the failure to receive funding or the termination of one or more of these contracts could reduce our sales. Sales to the U.S. government and its prime contractors and subcontractors represent a significant portion of our business. The funding of these programs is generally subject to annual congressional appropriations, and congressional priorities are subject to change. In addition, government expenditures for defense programs may decline or these defense programs may be terminated. A decline in governmental expenditures or the termination of existing contracts may result in a reduction in the volume of contracts awarded to us. We have resources applied to specific government contracts and if any of those contracts were terminated, we may incur substantial costs redeploying those resources.
If our subcontractors or suppliers fail to perform their contractual obligations, our prime contract performance and our ability to obtain future business could be materially and adversely impacted. Many of our contracts involve subcontracts with other companies upon which we rely to perform a portion of the services we must provide to our customers. There is a risk that we may have disputes with our subcontractors, including disputes regarding the quality and timeliness of work performed by the subcontractor or customer concerns about the subcontractor. Failure by our subcontractors to satisfactorily provide, on a timely basis, the agreed-upon supplies or perform the agreed-upon services may materially and adversely impact our ability to perform our obligations with our customer. Subcontractor performance deficiencies could result in a customer terminating our contract for default. A default termination could expose us to liability and substantially impair our ability to compete for future contracts and orders. In addition, a delay in our ability to obtain components and equipment parts from our suppliers may affect our ability to meet our customers’ needs and may have an adverse effect upon our profitability.
Our results of operations are affected by our fixed-price contracts, which could subject us to losses in the event that we have cost overruns. For the year ended December 31, 2016, fixed-price contracts represented almost all of the Company’s sales. On fixed-price contracts, we agree to perform the scope of work specified in the contract for a predetermined price. Depending on the fixed price negotiated, these contacts may provide us with an opportunity to achieve higher profits based on the relationship between our costs and the contract’s fixed price. However, we bear the risk that increased or unexpected costs may reduce our profit.
Some of our contracts contain late delivery penalties. Failure to deliver in a timely manner due to supplier problems, development schedule slides, manufacturing difficulties, or similar schedule related events could have a material adverse effect on our business.


8


The failure of our products may damage our reputation, necessitate a product recall or result in claims against us that exceed our insurance coverage, thereby requiring us to pay significant damages. Defects in the design and manufacture of our products may necessitate a product recall. We include complex system design and components in our products that could contain errors or defects, particularly when we incorporate new technology into our products. If any of our products are defective, we could be required to redesign or recall those products or pay substantial damages or warranty claims. Such an event could result in significant expenses, disrupt sales and affect our reputation and that of our products. We are also exposed to product liability claims. We carry aircraft and non-aircraft product liability insurance consistent with industry norms. However, this insurance coverage may not be sufficient to fully cover the payment of any potential claim. A product recall or a product liability claim not covered by insurance could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in discount rates and other estimates could affect our future earnings and equity. Our goodwill asset impairment evaluations are determined using valuations that involve several assumptions, including discount rates, cash flow estimates, growth rates and terminal values. Certain of these assumptions, particularly the discount rate, are based on market conditions and are outside of our control. Changes in these assumptions could affect our future earnings and equity.
Additionally, pension obligations and the related costs are determined using actual results and actuarial valuations that involve several assumptions. The most critical assumption is the discount rate. Other assumptions include mortality, salary increases and retirement age. The discount rate assumptions are based on current market conditions and are outside of our control. Changes in these assumptions could affect our future earnings and equity.
We are subject to financing and interest rate exposure risks that could adversely affect our business, liquidity and operating results. Changes in the availability, terms and cost of capital, and increases in interest rates could cause our cost of doing business to increase and place us at a competitive disadvantage. At December 31, 2016, approximately 8% of our debt was at fixed interest rates with the remainder subject to variable interest rates.
Contracting in the defense industry is subject to significant regulation, including rules related to bidding, billing and accounting kickbacks and false claims, and any non-compliance could subject us to fines and penalties or possible debarment. Like all government contractors, we are subject to risks associated with this contracting. These risks include the potential for substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties. These fines and penalties could be imposed for failing to follow procurement integrity and bidding rules, employing improper billing practices or otherwise failing to follow cost accounting standards, receiving or paying kickbacks or filing false claims. We have been, and expect to continue to be, subjected to audits and investigations by government agencies. The failure to comply with the terms of our government contracts could harm our business reputation. It could also result in suspension or debarment from future government contracts.
If we fail to meet expectations of securities analysts or investors due to fluctuations in our revenue or operating results, our stock price could decline significantly. Our revenue and earnings may fluctuate from quarter to quarter due to a number of factors, including delays or cancellations of programs. It is likely that in some future quarters our operating results may fall below the expectations of securities analysts or investors. In this event, the trading price of our stock could decline significantly.
Our operations in foreign countries expose us to political and currency risks and adverse changes in local legal and regulatory environments. In 2016, approximately 7.9% of our sales were made by our subsidiaries in France and Canada. Net assets held by these subsidiaries total $36.8 million at December 31, 2016. Our financial results may be adversely affected by fluctuations in foreign currencies and by the translation of the financial statements of our foreign subsidiaries from local currencies into U.S. dollars. We expect international operations and export sales to continue to contribute to our earnings for the foreseeable future. Both the sales from international operations and export sales are subject in varying degrees to risks inherent in doing business outside of the U.S. Such risks include the possibility of unfavorable circumstances arising from host country laws or regulations, changes in tariff and trade barriers and import or export licensing requirements, and political or economic reprioritization, insurrection, civil disturbance or war.
Government regulations could limit our ability to sell our products outside the U.S. and could otherwise adversely affect our business. Certain of our sales are subject to compliance with U.S. export regulations. Our failure to obtain, or fully adhere to the limitations contained in, the requisite licenses, meet registration standards or comply with other government export regulations would hinder our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our products outside the U.S. Compliance with these government regulations may also subject us to additional fees and operating costs. The absence of comparable restrictions on competitors in other countries may adversely affect our competitive position. In order to sell our products in European Union countries, we must satisfy certain technical requirements. If we are unable to comply with those requirements with respect to a significant quantity of our products, our sales in Europe would be restricted. Doing business internationally also subjects us to

9


numerous U.S. and foreign laws and regulations, including regulations relating to import-export control, technology transfer restrictions, foreign corrupt practices and anti-boycott provisions. Our failure, or failure by an authorized agent or representative that is attributable to us, to comply with these laws and regulations could result in administrative, civil or criminal liabilities and could, in the extreme case, result in monetary penalties, suspension or debarment from government contracts or suspension of our export privileges, which would have a material adverse effect on us.
Our stock price is volatile. For the year ended December 31, 2016, our stock price ranged from a low of $21.76 to a high of $40.70. The price of our common stock has been and likely will continue to be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a number of events and factors, such as:
 
quarterly variations in operating results;
variances of our quarterly results of operations from securities analyst estimates;
changes in financial estimates;
announcements of technological innovations and new products;
news reports relating to trends in our markets; and
the cancellation of major contracts or programs with our customers.
In addition, the stock market in general, and the market prices for companies in the aerospace & defense industry in particular, have experienced significant price and volume fluctuations that often have been unrelated to the operating performance of the companies affected by these fluctuations. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our operating performance.
We may incur losses and liabilities as a result of our acquisition strategy. Growth by acquisition involves risks that could adversely affect our financial condition and operating results, including:
 
diversion of management time and attention from our core business;
the potential exposure to unanticipated liabilities;
the potential that expected benefits or synergies are not realized and that operating costs increase;
the risks associated with incurring additional acquisition indebtedness, including that additional indebtedness could limit our cash flow availability for operations and our flexibility;
difficulties in integrating the operations and personnel of acquired companies; and
the potential loss of key employees, suppliers or customers of acquired businesses.
In addition, any acquisition, once successfully integrated, could negatively impact our financial performance if it does not perform as planned, does not increase earnings, or does not prove otherwise to be beneficial to us.
We currently are involved or may become involved in the future, in legal proceedings that, if adversely adjudicated or settled, could materially impact our financial condition. As an aerospace company, we may become a party to litigation in the ordinary course of our business, including, among others, matters alleging product liability, warranty claims, breach of commercial or government contract or other legal actions. In general, litigation claims can be expensive and time consuming to bring or defend against and could result in settlements or damages that could significantly impact results of operations and financial condition.
We are a defendant in actions filed in the Regional State Court of Mannheim, Germany (Lufthansa Technik AG v. Astronics Advanced Electronics Systems Corp.) and the United States District for the Western District of Washington relating to an allegation of patent infringement. On December 29, 2010, Lufthansa Technik AG (“Lufthansa”) filed a Statement of Claim in the Regional State Court of Mannheim, Germany. Lufthansa’s claim asserts that our subsidiary, AES sold, marketed and brought into use in Germany a power supply system that infringes upon a German patent held by Lufthansa. The relief sought by Lufthansa includes requiring AES to stop selling and marketing the allegedly infringing power supply system, a recall of allegedly infringing products sold to commercial customers since November 26, 2003 and compensation for damages. The claim does not specify an estimate of damages and a damages claim will be made by Lufthansa only if it receives a favorable ruling on the determination of infringement.

10



On February 6, 2015, the Regional State Court of Mannheim, Germany rendered its decision that the patent was infringed. The judgment does not require AES to recall products that are already installed in aircraft or have been sold to other end users.  On July 15, 2015, Lufthansa advised AES of their intention to enforce the accounting provisions of the decision, which required AES to provide certain financial information regarding sales of the infringing product to enable Lufthansa to make an estimate of requested damages. Additionally, if Lufthansa provides the required bank guarantee specified in the decision, the Company may be required to offer a recall of products that are in the distribution channels in Germany. No such bank guarantee has been issued to date. As of December 31, 2016 there are no products in the distribution channels in Germany.

The Company appealed to the Higher Regional Court of Karlsruhe.  On November 15, 2016, the Court issued its ruling and upheld the lower court’s decision.  The Company has submitted a petition to grant AES leave for appeal to the Federal Supreme Court. The Company believes it has valid defenses to refute the decision.  Should the Federal Supreme Court decide to hear the case, the appeal process is estimated to extend up to two years. We estimate AES’s potential exposure related to this matter to be approximately $1 million to $3 million. As loss exposure is not probable at this time, the Company has not recorded any liability with respect to this litigation as of December 31, 2016.

On November 26, 2014, Lufthansa filed a complaint in the United States District for the Western District of Washington. Lufthansa’s complaint in this action alleges that AES manufactures, uses, sells and offers for sale a power supply system that infringes upon a U.S. patent held by Lufthansa. The patent at issue in the U.S. action is based on technology similar to that involved in the German action. On April 25, 2016, the Court issued its ruling on claim construction, holding that the sole independent claim in the patent is indefinite, rendering all claims in the patent indefinite. Based on this ruling, AES filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the Court’s ruling that the patent is indefinite renders the patent invalid and unenforceable. On July 20, 2016, the U.S. District Court granted the motion for summary judgment and issued an order dismissing all claims against AES with prejudice. Lufthansa has filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Company believes that it has valid defenses to Lufthansa’s claims and will vigorously contest the appeal. As loss exposure is neither probable nor estimable at this time, the Company has not recorded any liability with respect to this litigation as of December 31, 2016.

Other than these proceedings, we are not party to any significant pending legal proceedings that management believes will result in a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
ITEM 1B.
UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None

11


ITEM 2.    PROPERTIES
On December 31, 2016, we own or lease 1.0 million square feet of space in the U.S., Canada and France, distributed as follows:
 
Owned
 
Leased
 
Total
Aerospace:
 
 
 
 
 
Clackamas, OR
237,000

 

 
237,000

Kirkland, WA
97,000

 
39,500

 
136,500

East Aurora, NY
125,000

 

 
125,000

Ft. Lauderdale, FL
96,000

 

 
96,000

Lebanon, NH
80,000

 

 
80,000

Montierchaume, France*

 
80,000

 
80,000

Itasca, IL
49,000

 

 
49,000

Amherst, NH

 
28,000

 
28,000

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

 
25,000

 
25,000

Everett, WA

 
22,000

 
22,000

Aerospace Square Feet
684,000

 
194,500

 
878,500

Test Systems:
 
 
 
 
 
Irvine, CA*

 
99,000

 
99,000

Orlando, FL

 
51,000

 
51,000

Test Systems Square Feet

 
150,000

 
150,000

Total Square Feet
684,000

 
344,500

 
1,028,500

* - Capitalized leases.
Upon the expiration of our current leases, we believe that we will be able to either secure renewal terms or enter into leases for or purchases of alternative locations at market terms. We believe that our properties have been adequately maintained and are generally in good condition.
ITEM 3.
LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

On December 29, 2010, Lufthansa Technik AG (“Lufthansa”) filed a Statement of Claim in the Regional State Court of Mannheim, Germany. Lufthansa’s claim asserts that our subsidiary, AES sold, marketed and brought into use in Germany a power supply system that infringes upon a German patent held by Lufthansa. The relief sought by Lufthansa includes requiring AES to stop selling and marketing the allegedly infringing power supply system, a recall of allegedly infringing products sold to commercial customers since November 26, 2003 and compensation for damages. The claim does not specify an estimate of damages and a damages claim will be made by Lufthansa only if it receives a favorable ruling on the determination of infringement.

On February 6, 2015, the Regional State Court of Mannheim, Germany rendered its decision that the patent was infringed. The judgment does not require AES to recall products that are already installed in aircraft or have been sold to other end users.  On July 15, 2015, Lufthansa advised AES of their intention to enforce the accounting provisions of the decision, which required AES to provide certain financial information regarding sales of the infringing product to enable Lufthansa to make an estimate of requested damages. Additionally, if Lufthansa provides the required bank guarantee specified in the decision, the Company may be required to offer a recall of products that are in the distribution channels in Germany. No such bank guarantee has been issued to date. As of December 31, 2016 there are no products in the distribution channels in Germany.

The Company appealed to the Higher Regional Court of Karlsruhe.  On November 15, 2016, the Court issued its ruling and upheld the lower court’s decision.  The Company has submitted a petition to grant AES leave for appeal to the Federal Supreme Court. The Company believes it has valid defenses to refute the decision.  Should the Federal Supreme Court decide to hear the case, the appeal process is estimated to extend up to two years. We estimate AES’s potential exposure related to this matter to be approximately $1 million to $3 million. As loss exposure is not probable at this time, the Company has not recorded any liability with respect to this litigation as of December 31, 2016.


12


On November 26, 2014, Lufthansa filed a complaint in the United States District for the Western District of Washington. Lufthansa’s complaint in this action alleges that AES manufactures, uses, sells and offers for sale a power supply system that infringes upon a U.S. patent held by Lufthansa. The patent at issue in the U.S. action is based on technology similar to that involved in the German action. On April 25, 2016, the Court issued its ruling on claim construction, holding that the sole independent claim in the patent is indefinite, rendering all claims in the patent indefinite. Based on this ruling, AES filed a motion for summary judgment on the grounds that the Court’s ruling that the patent is indefinite renders the patent invalid and unenforceable. On July 20, 2016, the U.S. District Court granted the motion for summary judgment and issued an order dismissing all claims against AES with prejudice. Lufthansa has filed an appeal with the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The Company believes that it has valid defenses to Lufthansa’s claims and will vigorously contest the appeal. As loss exposure is neither probable nor estimable at this time, the Company has not recorded any liability with respect to this litigation as of December 31, 2016.

Other than these proceedings, we are not party to any significant pending legal proceedings that management believes will result in a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
ITEM 4.
MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not Applicable

13


PART II
 
ITEM 5.    MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
The table below sets forth the range of prices for the Company’s Common Stock, traded on the NASDAQ National Market System, for each quarterly period during the last two years. The approximate number of shareholders of record as of February 17, 2017, was 825 for Common Stock and 2,286 for Class B Stock.
 
2016
High
 
Low
First
$
34.55

 
$
21.76

Second
$
34.22

 
$
27.65

Third
$
39.17

 
$
28.05

Fourth
$
40.70

 
$
30.76

 
2015
High
 
Low
First
$
56.75

 
$
38.56

Second
$
57.92

 
$
50.90

Third
$
53.69

 
$
29.34

Fourth
$
36.94

 
$
30.10

The Company has not paid any cash dividends in the three-year period ended December 31, 2016. The Company has no plans to pay cash dividends as it plans to retain all cash from operations as a source of capital to finance growth in the business.
On September 26, 2016, the Company announced a three-for-twenty distribution of Class B Stock to holders of both Common and Class B Stock. Stockholders received three shares of Class B Stock for every twenty shares of Common and Class B Stock held on the record date of October 11, 2016. Fractional shares were paid in cash. All share quantities, share prices and per share data reported throughout this report have been adjusted to reflect the impact of this distribution.

The following table summarizes our purchases of our common stock for the quarter ended December 31, 2016.

Period
(a) Total Number of Shares Purchased
(b) Average Price Paid Per Share
(c) Total Number of Shares Purchased as Part of Publicly Announced Plans or Programs
(d) Maximum Dollar Value of Shares that may yet be Purchased Under the Program (1)
November 1, 2016 - November 26, 2016 (2)
22,488
$34.64
5,731
$32,382,000
November 27, 2016 - December 31, 2016 (3)
1,118
$37.62
$32,382,000


(1) On February 24, 2016, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $50 million of common stock.

(2) There were 16,757 shares transferred to us by employees in connection with the exercise of stock options. The remainder were shares purchased in the open market pursuant to our repurchase program.
(3) There were 1,118 shares transferred to us by employees in connection with the exercise of stock options.

14


The following graph and table shows the performance of the Company’s common stock compared with the S&P 500 Index — Total Return and the NASDAQ US and Foreign Companies for a $100 investment made December 31, 2011:
 
trpgraph.jpg 

 
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
2015
 
2016
Astronics Corp.
Return %

 
(27.61
)
 
122.90

 
30.51

 
(15.99
)
 
(1.75
)
 
Cum $
100.00

 
72.39

 
161.37

 
210.61

 
176.92

 
173.82

S&P 500 Index - Total Returns
Return %

 
16.00

 
32.39

 
13.69

 
1.38

 
11.96

 
Cum $
100.00

 
116.00

 
153.57

 
174.60

 
177.01

 
198.18

NASDAQ Stock Market (US and Foreign Companies)
Return %

 
17.41

 
40.10

 
14.43

 
6.99

 
8.82

 
Cum $
100.00

 
117.41

 
164.50

 
188.23

 
201.40

 
219.15


15


ITEM 6.     SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
Five-Year Performance Highlights 
 
2016
 
2015 (4)
 
2014 (3)
 
2013 (2)
 
2012
(Amounts in thousands, except for employee and per share data)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Sales
$
633,123

 
$
692,279

 
$
661,039

 
$
339,937

 
$
266,446

Net Income
$
48,424

 
$
66,974

 
$
56,170

 
$
27,266

 
$
21,874

Net Margin
7.6
%
 
9.7
%
 
8.5
%
 
8.0
%
 
8.2
%
Diluted Earnings Per Share (1)
$
1.61

 
$
2.22

 
$
1.87

 
$
0.94

 
$
0.76

Weighted Average Shares Outstanding – Diluted (1)
30,032

 
30,179

 
29,970

 
29,136

 
28,816

Return on Average Equity
15.2
%
 
25.3
%
 
28.1
%
 
18.4
%
 
19.2
%
YEAR-END FINANCIAL POSITION:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Working Capital
$
168,513

 
$
145,735

 
$
136,602

 
$
125,961

 
$
60,042

Total Assets
$
604,344

 
$
609,243

 
$
562,910

 
$
491,271

 
$
211,989

Indebtedness
$
148,120

 
$
169,789

 
$
183,008

 
$
200,320

 
$
29,983

Shareholders’ Equity
$
337,449

 
$
300,225

 
$
228,177

 
$
171,509

 
$
125,134

Book Value Per Share (1)
$
11.60

 
$
10.21

 
$
7.87

 
$
6.05

 
$
4.52

OTHER YEAR-END DATA:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Depreciation and Amortization
$
25,790

 
$
25,309

 
$
27,254

 
$
11,059

 
$
6,905

Capital Expenditures
$
13,037

 
$
18,641

 
$
40,882

 
$
6,868

 
$
16,720

Shares Outstanding (1)
29,098

 
29,405

 
29,003

 
28,342

 
27,674

Number of Employees
2,304

 
2,304

 
2,041

 
1,715

 
1,156


(1) -
Diluted Earnings Per Share, Weighted Average Shares Outstanding - Diluted, Book Value Per Share and Shares Outstanding have been adjusted for the impact of the October 11, 2016 fifteen percent Class B stock distribution, October 8, 2015 fifteen percent Class B stock distribution, the September 5, 2014 twenty percent Class B stock distribution and the October 10, 2013 twenty percent Class B stock distribution.
(2) -
Information includes the results of Peco, acquired on July 18, 2013, AeroSat acquired on October 1, 2013 and PGA acquired December 5, 2013, each from the acquisition date forward.
(3) -
Information includes the results of ATS, acquired on February 28, 2014, from the acquisition date forward.
(4) -
Information includes the results of Armstrong, acquired on January 14, 2015, from the acquisition date forward.
ITEM 7.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
OVERVIEW
Astronics, through its subsidiaries, designs and manufactures advanced, high-performance electrical power generation, distribution and motion systems, lighting & safety systems, avionics products, aircraft structures, systems certification and automated test systems.
Our strategy is to increase our value by developing technologies and capabilities either internally or through acquisition, and using those capabilities to provide innovative solutions to the aerospace & defense, semiconductor and other markets where our technology can be beneficial.
We have two reportable segments, Aerospace and Test Systems. Our Aerospace segment has ten principal operating facilities with one located in New York State, Florida, Illinois, Oregon, Quebec, Canada and Montierchaume, France; and two in New Hampshire and two in Washington State. Our Test Systems segment has facilities located in Florida and California.
Our Aerospace segment serves three primary markets. They are the military, commercial transport and business jet markets. Our Test Systems segment serves the aerospace & defense and semiconductor markets.

16


Important factors affecting our growth and profitability are the rate at which new aircraft are produced, government funding of military programs, our ability to have our products designed into new aircraft and the rates at which aircraft owners, including commercial airlines, refurbish or install upgrades to their aircraft. New aircraft build rates and aircraft owners spending on upgrades and refurbishments is cyclical and dependent on the strength of the global economy. Once designed into a new aircraft, the spare parts business is frequently retained by the Company. Future growth and profitability of the test business is dependent on developing and procuring new and follow-on business in the semiconductor market as well as with the military. The nature of our test systems business is such that it pursues large multi-year projects. There can be significant periods of time between orders in this business which may result in large fluctuations of sales and profit levels and backlog from period to period.
Each of the markets that we serve presents opportunities that we expect will provide growth for the Company over the long-term. We continue to look for opportunities in all of our markets to capitalize on our core competencies to expand our existing business and to grow through strategic acquisitions.
Challenges which continue to face us include improving shareholder value through increasing profitability. Increasing profitability is dependent on many things, primarily revenue growth and the Company’s ability to control operating expenses and to identify means of creating improved productivity. Revenue is driven by increased build rates for existing aircraft, market acceptance and economic success of new aircraft, continued government funding of defense programs, the Company’s ability to obtain production contracts for parts we currently supply or have been selected to design and develop for new aircraft platforms and continually identifying and winning new business for our Test Systems segment. Our semiconductor test products are highly dependent on winning new and follow-on programs with our current customers as well as developing new customers. Reduced aircraft build rates driven by a weak economy, tight credit markets, reduced air passenger travel and an increasing supply of used aircraft on the market would likely result in reduced demand for our products, which will result in lower profits. Reduction of defense spending may result in fewer opportunities for us to compete, which could result in lower profits in the future. Many of our newer development programs are based on new and unproven technology and at the same time we are challenged to develop the technology on a schedule that is consistent with specific programs. We will continue to address these challenges by working to improve operating efficiencies and focusing on executing on the growth opportunities currently in front of us.
ACQUISITIONS
On January 14, 2015, the Company purchased 100% of the equity of Armstrong for approximately $52.3 million in cash. Armstrong, located in Itasca, Illinois, is a leading provider of engineering, design and certification solutions for commercial aircraft, specializing in connectivity, in-flight entertainment, and electrical power systems. Armstrong is included in our Aerospace segment.
On February 28, 2014, Astronics, through its wholly owned subsidiary ATS, completed the acquisition of substantially all of the assets and liabilities of EADS North America’s Test and Services division. ATS is located in Irvine, California and is a leading provider of highly engineered automatic test systems, subsystems and instruments for the semiconductor, consumer electronics, commercial aerospace & defense industries. The purchase price was approximately $69.4 million in cash.
MARKETS
Commercial Transport Market
Sales to the commercial transport market include sales of electrical power generation, distribution and motion products, lighting & safety products, avionics products, systems certification and structures products. Sales to this market totaled approximately $435.6 million or 68.8% of our consolidated sales in 2016.
Maintaining and growing sales to the commercial transport market will depend on airlines’ capital spending budgets for cabin upgrades as well as the purchase of new aircraft by global airlines. This spending by the airlines is impacted by their profits, cash flow and available financing as well as competitive pressures between the airlines to improve the travel experience for their passengers. We expect that new aircraft will be equipped with more passenger and aircraft connectivity and in-seat power than previous generation aircraft. This market has experienced strong growth from airlines installing in-seat passenger power systems on their existing and newly delivered aircraft. Our ability to maintain and grow sales to this market depends on our ability to maintain our technological advantages over our competitors and maintain our relationships with major in-flight entertainment suppliers and global airlines.


17


Military Aerospace Market
Sales to the military aerospace market include sales of lighting & safety products, avionics products, electrical power & motion products and other products. Sales to this market totaled approximately 8.6% of our consolidated revenue and amounted to $54.6 million in 2016.
The military market is dependent on governmental funding which can change from year to year. Risks are that overall spending may be reduced in the future, specific programs may be eliminated or that we fail to win new business through the competitive bid process. Astronics does not have significant reliance on any one program such that cancellation of a particular program will cause material financial loss. We believe that we will continue to have opportunities similar to past years regarding this market.
Business Jet Market
Sales to the business jet aerospace market include sales of lighting & safety products, avionics products, and electrical power & motion products. Sales to this market totaled approximately 4.0% of our consolidated revenue in 2016 and amounted to $25.4 million.
Sales to the business jet market are driven by our ship set content on new aircraft and build rates of new aircraft. Business jet OEM build rates continue to be significantly impacted by slow global wealth creation and corporate profitability which have been negatively affected during the past several years by global economic uncertainty among prospective buyers. Our sales to the business jet market will continue to be challenged in the upcoming year as business jet aircraft production rates are not expected to increase significantly during 2017 due to global macroeconomic conditions. Despite the current market conditions, we continue to see opportunities on new aircraft currently in the design phase to employ our lighting & safety, electrical power and avionics technologies in the business jet market. There is risk involved in the development of any new aircraft including the risk that the aircraft will not ultimately be produced or that it will be produced in lower quantities than originally expected and thus impacting our return on our engineering and development efforts.
Other Aerospace
Sales of our other aerospace products include sales of airfield lighting products and other Peco products. Sales to this market totaled approximately 2.9% of our total revenue or $18.5 million in 2016.
Tests Systems Products
Our Test Systems segment accounted for approximately 15.7% of our consolidated sales in 2016 and amounted to $99.1 million. Sales to the semiconductor market were approximately $37.9 million. Sales to the aerospace & defense market were approximately $61.1 million in 2016.
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Our financial statements and accompanying notes are prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. The preparation of the Company’s financial statements requires management to make estimates, assumptions and judgments that affect the amounts reported. These estimates, assumptions and judgments are affected by management’s application of accounting policies, which are discussed in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 1 of Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this report. The critical accounting policies have been reviewed with the Audit Committee of our Board of Directors.
Revenue Recognition
The vast majority of our sales agreements are for standard products and services, with revenue recognized on the accrual basis at the time of shipment of goods, transfer of title and customer acceptance, where required. There are no significant contracts allowing for right of return. To a limited extent, certain of our contracts involve multiple elements (such as equipment and service). The Company recognizes revenue for delivered elements when they have stand-alone value to the customer, they have been accepted by the customer, and for which there are only customary refund or return rights. Arrangement consideration is allocated to the deliverables by use of the relative selling price method. The selling price used for each deliverable is based on vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) if available, third party-evidence (“TPE”) if VSOE is not available, or estimated selling price if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. Estimated selling price is determined in a manner consistent with that used to establish the price to sell the deliverable on a standalone basis.

18


For prepaid service contracts, sales revenue is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract, unless historical evidence indicates the costs are incurred on other than a straight-line basis.
Revenue of approximately $20.7 million, $17.2 million and $2.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, was recognized from long-term, fixed-price contracts using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, measured by multiplying the estimated total contract value by the ratio of actual contract costs incurred to date to the estimated total contract costs. The Company makes significant estimates involving its usage of percentage-of-completion accounting to recognize contract revenues. The Company periodically reviews contracts in process for estimates-to-completion, and revises estimated gross profit accordingly. While the Company believes its estimated gross profit on contracts in process is reasonable, unforeseen events and changes in circumstances can take place in a subsequent accounting period that may cause the Company to revise its estimated gross profit on one or more of its contracts in process. Accordingly, the ultimate gross profit realized upon completion of such contracts can vary significantly from estimated amounts between accounting periods. For contracts with anticipated losses at completion, a charge is taken against income for the amount of the entire loss in the period in which it is estimated.
Reviews for Impairment of Long-Lived Assets
Goodwill Impairment Testing
Our goodwill is the result of the excess of purchase price over net assets acquired from acquisitions. As of December 31, 2016, we had approximately $115.2 million of goodwill. As of December 31, 2015, we had approximately $115.4 million of goodwill. The change in goodwill is due to currency translation adjustments.
We identify our reporting units by assessing whether the components of our operating segments constitute businesses for which discrete financial information is available and segment management regularly reviews the operating results of those components. The Test Systems operating segment is its own reporting unit while the other reporting units are one level below our Aerospace operating segment.
Companies may perform a qualitative assessment as the initial step in the annual goodwill impairment testing process for all or selected reporting units under certain circumstances. Companies are also allowed to bypass the qualitative analysis and perform a quantitative analysis if desired. Economic uncertainties and the length of time from the calculation of a baseline fair value are factors that we would consider in determining whether to perform a quantitative test.
When we evaluate the potential for goodwill impairment using a qualitative assessment, we consider factors including, but not limited to, macroeconomic conditions, industry conditions, the competitive environment, changes in the market for our products and services, regulatory and political developments, entity specific factors such as strategy and changes in key personnel and overall financial performance. If, after completing this assessment, it is determined that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying value, we proceed to a quantitative two-step impairment test.
Quantitative testing first requires a comparison of the fair value of each reporting unit to the carrying value. We use the discounted cash flow method to estimate the fair value of each of our reporting units. The discounted cash flow method incorporates various assumptions, the most significant being projected revenue growth rates, operating profit margins and cash flows, the terminal growth rate and the discount rate. Management projects revenue growth rates, operating margins and cash flows based on each reporting unit’s current business, expected developments and operational strategies. If the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, goodwill is considered impaired and any loss must be measured.
In measuring the impairment loss, the implied fair value of goodwill is determined by assigning a fair value to all of the reporting unit’s assets and liabilities, including any unrecognized intangible assets, as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination at fair value. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit goodwill exceeds its implied fair value, an impairment loss would be recognized in an amount equal to that excess.
In 2016, we performed quantitative assessments for the eight reporting units which have goodwill and concluded that it is more likely than not that their fair values exceed their carrying values. Based on our quantitative assessments of our reporting units, we concluded that goodwill was not impaired.



19


Amortized Intangible Asset Impairment Testing
Amortizable intangible assets with a carrying value of $98.1 million at December 31, 2016 and $108.3 million at December 31, 2015 are amortized over their assigned useful lives. We test these long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of those assets may not be recoverable. The recoverability test consists of comparing the projected undiscounted cash flows associated with the asset to its carrying amount. An impairment loss would then be recognized for the carrying amount in excess of its fair value. There were no impairment charges in 2016, 2015 or 2014.
Depreciable Asset Impairment Testing
Property, plant and equipment with a carrying value of $122.8 million at December 31, 2016 and $124.7 million at December 31, 2015 are depreciated over their assigned useful lives. We test these long-lived assets for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of those assets may not be recoverable. The recoverability test consists of comparing the projected undiscounted cash flows, with its carrying amount. An impairment loss would then be recognized for the carrying amount in excess of its fair value. There were no impairment charges in 2016, 2015 or 2014.
Inventory Valuation
We record valuation reserves to provide for excess, slow moving or obsolete inventory or to reduce inventory to the lower of cost or market value. In determining the appropriate reserve, management considers the age of inventory on hand, the overall inventory levels in relation to forecasted demands as well as reserving for specifically identified inventory that we believe is no longer salable. At December 31, 2016, our reserve for inventory valuation was $15.4 million, or 11.7% of gross inventory. At December 31, 2015, our reserve for inventory valuation was $14.6 million, or 11.2% of gross inventory.
Deferred Tax Asset Valuation Allowances
Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and the amounts used for income tax purposes. We record a valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount of future tax benefit that we believe is more likely than not to be realized. Significant assumptions regarding future profitability is required to estimate the value of these deferred tax assets. We consider allowable tax carryforward periods, historical earnings performance, tax planning strategies and recent earnings projections to determine the amount of the valuation allowance. Changes in these factors could cause us to adjust our valuation allowance, which would impact our income tax expense and the carrying value of these assets when we determine that these factors have changed.
As of December 31, 2016, we had net deferred tax liabilities of $8.7 million. Included in the net deferred tax liabilities are approximately $24.2 million in deferred tax assets net of a $3.8 million valuation allowance. These deferred tax assets principally relate to employee benefit liabilities, asset reserves, leases, deferred revenue, state net operating loss carry-forwards, and state general business tax credit carry-forwards.
As of December 31, 2015, we had net deferred tax liabilities of $13.4 million. Included in the net deferred tax liabilities are approximately $20.5 million in deferred tax assets net of a $2.6 million valuation allowance. These deferred tax assets principally relate to employee benefit liabilities, asset reserves, leases, deferred revenue, state net operating loss carry-forwards and state general business tax credit carry-forwards.
Because of the uncertainty as to the Company’s ability to generate sufficient future taxable income in certain states, the Company has recorded the valuation allowances accordingly in 2016 and 2015.
Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan (SERP) Assumptions
We maintain two non-qualified defined benefit supplemental retirement plans (“SERP” and “SERP II”) for certain executive officers and retired former executive officers. Expense for these plans in 2016 was $1.9 million and in 2015 was $2.1 million. Plan obligations and the related costs are determined using actuarial valuations that involve several assumptions that may be highly uncertain and may have a material impact on the financial statements if different reasonable assumptions had been used. The most critical assumptions include the discount rate, future wage increases, retirement age and life expectancy. The discount rate is used to state expected future cash flows at present value. Using a lower discount rate increases the present value of pension obligations and increases pension expense. For determining the discount rate the Company considers long-term interest rates for high-grade corporate bonds. The discount rate for determining the expense recognized in 2016 was 4.45% compared with 4.05% in 2015. We will use a discount rate of 4.20% in determining our 2017 expense. The assumption for compensation

20


increases takes a long-term view of inflation and performance based salary adjustments based on the Company’s approach to executive compensation. The rate used for future wage increases was 3-5%. It was assumed that each participant retires after fully vesting in the plan at age 62 or 65. A 100 point increase in the discount rate we used would decrease our annual pension expense for 2017 by $0.2 million. If we had assumed annual wage increases of 4-6%, our 2017 pension expense would increase approximately $0.2 million.
Stock-Based Compensation
We have stock-based compensation plans, which include non-qualified stock options as well as incentive stock options. Expense recognized for stock-based compensation was $2.3 million for 2016, $2.3 million for 2015 and $1.7 million for 2014. We determine the fair value of the option awards at the date of grant using a Black-Scholes model. Option pricing models require management to make assumptions and to apply judgment to determine the fair value of the award. These assumptions and judgments include estimating the future volatility of our stock price, expected dividend yield, future employee stock option exercise behaviors and future employee turnover rates. Changes in these assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimate.
Acquisitions
The Company accounts for its acquisitions under ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations and Reorganizations (“ASC Topic 805”). ASC Topic 805 provides guidance on how the acquirer recognizes and measures the consideration transferred, identifiable assets acquired, liabilities assumed, non-controlling interests, and goodwill acquired in a business combination. ASC Topic 805 also expands required disclosures surrounding the nature and financial effects of business combinations. Acquisition costs are expensed as incurred. Acquisition related expenses were insignificant in 2016, and were $0.4 million and $0.3 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively.
When the Company acquires a business, we allocate the purchase price to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed in the transaction at their respective estimated fair values. We record any premium over the fair value of net assets acquired as goodwill. The allocation of the purchase price involves judgments and estimates both in characterizing the assets and in determining their fair value. The way we characterize the assets has important implications, as long-lived assets with definitive lives, for example, are depreciated or amortized, whereas goodwill is tested annually for impairment, as explained previously. With respect to determining the fair value of assets, the most subjective estimates involve valuations of long-lived assets, such as property, plant, and equipment as well as identified intangible assets. We use all available information to make these fair value determinations and engage independent valuation specialists to assist in the fair value determination of the acquired long-lived assets. The fair values of long-lived assets are determined using valuation techniques that use discounted cash flow methods, independent market appraisals and other acceptable valuation techniques.
With respect to determining the fair value of the purchase price, the most subjective estimates involve valuations of contingent consideration. Significant judgment is necessary to determine the fair value of the purchase price when the transaction includes an earn-out provision, such as the earn-out provision included in our 2013 acquisition of AeroSat. We engage valuation specialists to assist in the determination of the fair value of contingent consideration. Key assumptions used to value the contingent consideration include future projections and discount rates.
During 2015, acquisitions added approximately $4.7 million in property, plant and equipment and $25.1 million in purchased intangible assets. See Note 18 in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, regarding the acquisitions in 2015 and 2014.






21


CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND OUTLOOK
 
2016
 
2015 (2)
 
2014 (1)
(Dollars in thousands)
 
 
 
Sales
$
633,123

 
$
692,279

 
$
661,039

Gross Margin
25.2
%
 
27.1
%
 
25.3
%
SG&A Expenses as a Percentage of Sales
13.6
%
 
12.9
%
 
12.1
%
Interest Expense
$
4,354

 
$
4,751

 
$
8,255

Effective Tax Rate
29.6
%
 
28.8
%
 
29.0
%
Net Income
$
48,424

 
$
66,974

 
$
56,170

 
(1)
Our results of operations for 2014 include the operations of ATS, beginning February 28, 2014.
(2)
Our results of operations for 2015 include the operations of Armstrong, beginning January 14, 2015.
A discussion by segment can be found at “Segment Results of Operations and Outlook” in this MD&A.
CONSOLIDATED OVERVIEW OF OPERATIONS
2016 Compared With 2015
Consolidated sales for 2016 decreased by $59.2 million, or 8.5%, to $633.1 million. Aerospace segment sales were down 2.9% year-over-year to $534.0 million, while Test Systems segment sales were down 30.5% to $99.1 million.
Consolidated cost of products sold decreased $30.6 million to $473.7 million in 2016 from $504.3 million in the prior year. Lower costs of products sold was the result of lower sales volume and lower warranty expenses. E&D costs were $90.2 million in 2016, consistent with $90.1 million in 2015. As a percent of sales, E&D was 14.2% and 13.0% in 2016 and 2015, respectively.
SG&A expenses were $86.3 million, or 13.6% of sales, in 2016 compared with $89.1 million, or 12.9% of sales, in the same period last year. The decline in SG&A expenses was due primarily to reduced commissions resulting from lower sales volumes. SG&A expenses in 2015 benefited from a $1.8 million write-down of a contingent consideration liability related to an acquisition earn-out obligation.
Interest expense decreased in 2016 compared to 2015 due to decreased debt levels.
2015 Compared With 2014
Consolidated sales for 2015 increased by $31.2 million, or 4.7%, to $692.3 million, from $661.0 million in 2014. The acquisition of Armstrong contributed $25.5 million to consolidated sales, while consolidated organic sales increased $5.7 million, or 0.9%.
Consolidated cost of products sold increased $10.3 million to $504.3 million in 2015 from $494.0 million in the prior year.  The increase was due primarily to the incremental cost of products sold associated with Armstrong of $20.9 million and increased E&D costs offset by lower step-up expense when compared to the same period last year. E&D costs were 13.0% of sales, or $90.1 million, which included $6.8 million for Armstrong, compared with $76.7 million, or 11.6% of sales, in the prior year. Cost of products sold in 2014 included $19.4 million related to inventory step-up expense, as compared to $1.0 million in 2015. Consolidated cost of products sold as a percentage of sales was 72.9% in 2015 compared with 74.7% in the prior year.
SG&A expenses were $89.1 million, or 12.9% of sales, in 2015 compared with $79.7 million, or 12.1% of sales, in the prior year. The increase was due primarily to the incremental SG&A costs of Armstrong, which added approximately $5.7 million to SG&A in 2015, including $2.2 million of amortization expense for acquired intangible assets of that business. SG&A expenses in 2014 were positively affected by a $5.0 million fair value writedown of a contingent consideration liability related to prior acquisitions, compared with a writedown of $1.8 million in 2015. These increases were partially offset by a decrease in amortization expense for acquired intangible assets of ATS of $4.7 million.
Interest expense decreased in 2015 compared to 2014 due to decreased debt levels.
Income Taxes
Our effective tax rates for 2016, 2015 and 2014 were 29.6%, 28.8% and 29.0%, respectively. Our tax rate is affected by recurring items, such as tax rates in foreign jurisdictions and the relative amount of income we earn in those jurisdictions,

22


which we expect to be fairly consistent in the near term. It is also affected by discrete items that may occur in any given year, but are not consistent from year to year. In addition to state income taxes, the following items had the most significant impact on the difference between our statutory U.S. federal income tax rate of 35% and our effective tax rate:
2016:
1.
Recognition of approximately $2.6 million of 2016 U.S. R&D tax credits.
2.
Permanent differences, primarily the impact of the Domestic Production Activities Deduction.
2015:
1.
Recognition of approximately $2.6 million of 2015 U.S. R&D tax credits.
2.
Permanent differences, primarily the impact of the Domestic Production Activities Deduction.
2014:
1.
Recognition of $1.8 million of 2014 U.S. R&D tax credits as well as $1.6 million of U.S. R&D tax credits recognized relating to prior years.
2.
Permanent differences, primarily the impact of the Domestic Production Activities Deduction.
3.
Foreign tax credits.
2017 Outlook
We expect consolidated sales in 2017 to be between $640.0 million and $720.0 million. Our consolidated backlog at December 31, 2016 was $258.0 million of which approximately $230.4 million is expected to ship in 2017.
We expect our capital equipment spending in 2017 to be in the range of $17.0 million to $22.0 million. E&D costs are expected to continue at roughly the same rate as 2016.
SEGMENT RESULTS OF OPERATIONS AND OUTLOOK
Operating profit, as presented below, is sales less cost of products sold and other operating expenses excluding interest expense, corporate expenses and other non-operating revenue and expenses. Cost of products sold and operating expenses are directly attributable to the respective segment. Operating profit is reconciled to earnings before income taxes in Note 17 of Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, of this report.
AEROSPACE SEGMENT 
(in thousands, except percentages)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Sales
$
534,041

 
$
549,738

 
$
494,747

Operating Profit
$
77,966

 
$
85,103

 
$
79,753

Operating Margin
14.6
%
 
15.5
%
 
16.1
%
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
Total Assets
$
500,892

 
$
510,884

 
 
Backlog
$
219,146

 
$
212,651

 
 

23


Sales by Market
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Commercial Transport
$
435,552

 
$
455,569

 
$
396,075

Military
54,556

 
43,295

 
42,434

Business Jet
25,407

 
32,796

 
38,819

Other
18,526

 
18,078

 
17,419

 
$
534,041

 
$
549,738

 
$
494,747

Sales by Product Line
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Electrical Power & Motion
$
288,465

 
$
279,752

 
$
254,455

Lighting & Safety
156,871

 
157,143

 
148,212

Avionics
32,761

 
56,150

 
57,879

Systems Certification
16,531

 
21,317

 

Structures
20,887

 
16,372

 
14,594

Other
18,526

 
19,004

 
19,607

 
$
534,041

 
$
549,738

 
$
494,747

2016 Compared With 2015
Aerospace segment sales decreased by $15.7 million, or 2.9%, when compared with the prior year to $534.0 million.
Electrical Power & Motion sales increased $8.7 million, or 3.1%, largely driven by higher sales of in-seat power products and seat motion products, which were up $7.0 million and $4.3 million, respectively. Sales of Structures products were up $4.5 million. These increases were offset by a $23.4 million decline in Avionics products, which was largely due to lower sales of satellite antenna systems and lower VVIP in-flight entertainment/cabin management systems, and a $4.8 million decrease in System Certification sales.
Aerospace operating profit for 2016 was $78.0 million, or 14.6% of sales, compared with $85.1 million, or 15.5% of sales, in the same period last year. The decrease in operating profit was the result of lower sales volume, coupled with slightly higher E&D costs and a general increase in operating costs. E&D costs for Aerospace were $78.5 million and $77.9 million in 2016 and 2015, respectively. Aerospace SG&A expense decreased slightly to $60.0 million in 2016, compared with $60.1 million in 2015.
2015 Compared With 2014
Aerospace segment sales increased by $55.0 million, or 11.1%, when compared with the prior year, to $549.7 million. Organic sales grew 6.0%, or $29.5 million, and sales from Armstrong added $25.5 million.
Aerospace sales growth year-to-date was driven by increased Electrical Power & Motion sales, which increased $25.3 million, or 9.9%. The increase in this product line was driven by in-seat power products, which increased 14.9% in 2015. The Lighting & Safety product line increased $8.9 million, or 6.0%, due to increased passenger service unit sales. Systems Certification sales was $21.3 million due to the January acquisition of Armstrong. The other Aerospace product lines comprised the remainder of the variance.
Aerospace operating profit for 2015 was $85.1 million, or 15.5% of sales, compared with $79.8 million, or 16.1% of sales in the prior year. Operating leverage gained on increased volume for the organic business was partially offset by higher organic E&D costs of approximately $6.2 million and lower operating margins from Armstrong. Aerospace SG&A expense increased $6.6 million in 2015 as compared with 2014. Incremental SG&A from Armstrong was $5.8 million, including $2.2 million of intangible asset amortization expense for acquired intangible assets. Operating profit in 2014 included inventory step-up costs of $2.6 million that reduced normal operating margins.
2017 Outlook for Aerospace – We expect 2017 Aerospace segment sales to be in the range of $560.0 million to $600.0 million. The Aerospace segment’s backlog at December 31, 2016 was $219.1 million, compared to $212.7 million at December 31, 2015. Approximately $197.8 million of the backlog at December 31, 2016 is expected to be shipped over the next 12 months.

24


TEST SYSTEMS SEGMENT 
(in thousands, except percentages)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Sales
$
99,082

 
$
142,541

 
$
166,292

Operating Profit (Loss)
$
8,507

 
$
25,529

 
$
12,401

Operating Margin
8.6
%
 
17.9
%
 
7.4
%
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
Total Assets
$
76,575

 
$
64,934

 
 
Backlog
$
38,887

 
$
61,713

 
 
Sales by Market
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Semiconductor
$
37,939

 
$
92,136

 
$
130,859

Aerospace & Defense
61,143

 
50,405

 
35,433

 
$
99,082

 
$
142,541

 
$
166,292

2016 Compared With 2015
Sales in 2016 decreased 30.5% to $99.1 million compared with sales of $142.5 million for 2015, due to lower shipments to the Semiconductor market. Sales to the Semiconductor market decreased $54.2 million compared with the same period in 2015, which was partially offset by increased sales of $10.7 million to the Aerospace & Defense market.
Operating profit was $8.5 million, or 8.6% of sales, compared with $25.5 million, or 17.9% of sales, in 2015. E&D costs were $11.7 million in 2016 compared with $12.2 million in the prior year.
2015 Compared With 2014
Sales in 2015 decreased 14.3% to $142.5 million compared with sales of $166.3 million for 2014, due to lower sales to the Semiconductor market. Sales to the Semiconductor market decreased $38.7 million compared with 2014, which was partially offset by increased sales of $14.9 million to the Aerospace & Defense market.
Operating profit was $25.5 million, or 17.9% of sales, compared with $12.4 million, or 7.4% of sales, in the prior year. Operating profit for 2014 was negatively impacted by non-recurring purchase accounting related inventory step-up costs of $16.8 million, and $1.7 million of charges related to work force reductions. Additionally, amortization expense in 2014 related to the ATS acquisition was approximately $6.0 million compared with $1.3 million in 2015. E&D costs were approximately $12.2 million in 2015, and $11.8 million in 2014.
2017 Outlook for Test Systems – We expect 2017 Test System segment sales to be in the range of $80.0 million to $120.0 million. The Test System segment’s backlog at December 31, 2016 was $38.9 million, compared with $61.7 million at December 31, 2015. Approximately $32.6 million is expected to be shipped over the next 12 months.
OFF BALANCE SHEET ARRANGEMENTS
We do not have material off-balance sheet arrangements that have or are reasonably likely to have a material future effect on our results of operations or financial condition.





25


CONTRACTUAL OBLIGATIONS
The following table represents contractual obligations as of December 31, 2016:
 
Payments Due by Period
(In thousands)
Total
 
2017
 
2018-2019
 
2020-2021
 
After 2021
Long-term Debt
$
148,120

 
$
2,636

 
$
4,445

 
$
140,145

 
$
894

Purchase Obligations
98,478

 
97,570

 
908

 

 

Interest on Long-term Debt
15,740

 
4,010

 
7,665

 
4,053

 
12

Supplemental Retirement Plan and Post Retirement Obligations
22,554

 
414

 
827

 
812

 
20,501

Operating Leases
5,885

 
2,380

 
3,368

 
137

 

Other Long-term Liabilities
123

 
9

 
23

 
29

 
62

Total Contractual Obligations
$
290,900

 
$
107,019

 
$
17,236

 
$
145,176

 
$
21,469

Notes to Contractual Obligations Table
Long-term Debt — See Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data, Note 6, Long-Term Debt and Note Payable in this report. The timing of the payments above consider the amendment to the revolving credit facility as discussed in Note 6.
Interest on Long-term Debt — Future interest payments have been calculated using the applicable interest rate of each debt facility based on actual borrowings as of December 31, 2016. Actual future borrowings and rates may differ from these estimates.
Purchase Obligations — Purchase obligations are comprised of the Company’s commitments for goods and services in the normal course of business.
Operating Leases — Operating lease obligations are primarily related to facility leases for AES, AeroSat, Ballard, ATS, Armstrong, and LSI Canada.
LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES
(in thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Net cash provided (used) by:
 
 
 
 
 
Operating Activities
$
48,854

 
$
78,501

 
$
99,874

Investing Activities
$
(14,622
)
 
$
(73,586
)
 
$
(109,120
)
Financing Activities
$
(34,806
)
 
$
(6,725
)
 
$
(23,113
)
Our cash flow from operations and available borrowing capacity provide us with the financial resources needed to run our operations and reinvest in our business.
Operating Activities
Cash provided by operating activities was $48.9 million in 2016 compared with $78.5 million in 2015. The decrease of $29.6 million in 2016 was primarily a result of decreased net income and net operating assets in 2016 when compared with 2015, partially offset by an increased deferred income tax benefit in 2016.
Cash provided by operating activities was $78.5 million in 2015 compared with $99.9 million in 2014. The decrease of $21.4 million in 2015 was primarily a result of the impact of increases in net operating assets in 2015 when compared with 2014 net of the effects from acquisitions of businesses.
Cash provided by operating activities was $99.9 million in 2014. This is an increase of $50.4 million from 2013 and was primarily a result of higher net income as adjusted for non-cash expenses and the impact of decreases in net operating assets in 2014 when compared with 2013 net of the effects from acquisitions of business.
Our cash flows from operations are primarily dependent on our net income adjusted for non-cash expenses and the timing of collections of receivables, level of inventory and payments to suppliers and employees. Sales and operating results of our Aerospace segment are influenced by the build rates of new aircraft, which are subject to general economic conditions, airline passenger travel and spending for government and military programs. Our Test Systems segment depends on capital

26


expenditures of the semiconductor industry which, in turn, depend on current and future demand for those products. A reduction in demand for our customers’ products would adversely affect our operating results and cash flows.
Investing Activities
Cash used for investing activities in 2016 was $14.6 million, primarily related to purchases of property, plant and equipment of $13.0 million.
Cash used for investing activities in 2015 was $73.6 million. The acquisition of Armstrong used approximately $52.3 million of cash in 2015 and purchases of property, plant and equipment (“PP&E”) used $18.6 million.
Cash used for investing activities in 2014 was $109.1 million. The acquisition of ATS used approximately $69.4 million of cash in 2014 and purchases of PP&E used $40.9 million, primarily related to the acquisition and modification of the new buildings for our Peco operation in Clackamas, Oregon ($24.7 million).
Our expectation for 2017 is that we will invest between $17.0 million and $22.0 million for PP&E. Future requirements for PP&E depend on numerous factors, including expansion of existing product lines and introduction of new products. Management believes that our cash flow from operations and current borrowing arrangements will provide for these capital expenditures. We expect to continue to evaluate acquisition opportunities in the future.
Financing Activities
Our ability to maintain sufficient liquidity is highly dependent upon achieving expected operating results. Failure to achieve expected operating results could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, our ability to obtain financing and our operations in the future. Our obligations under our Credit Agreement are jointly and severally guaranteed by each of our domestic subsidiaries. The obligations are secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of the Company’s and the guarantors’ assets and 100% of the issued and outstanding equity interest of each subsidiary.
The Company's Third Amended and Restated Credit Agreement provided for a $75 million five-year revolving credit facility and a $190 million five-year term loan, both expiring on June 30, 2018. The facilities carried an interest rate of LIBOR plus between 2.25% and 3.50%, depending on the Company’s leverage ratio as defined in the Credit Agreement. In addition, the Company was required to pay a commitment fee of between 0.25% and 0.50% on the unused portion of the total credit commitment for the preceding quarter, based on the Company’s leverage ratio under the credit agreement.
On February 28, 2014, with the funding of the acquisition of ATS, the Company amended its existing credit facility to exercise its option to increase the revolving credit commitment. The credit agreement provided for a $125 million, five-year revolving credit facility maturing on June 30, 2018, of which $58.0 million was drawn to finance the acquisition. In addition, the Company was required to pay a commitment fee quarterly at a rate of between 0.25% and 0.50% per annum on the unused portion of the total revolving credit commitment, based on the Company’s leverage ratio.
On September 26, 2014, the Company modified and extended its existing credit facility (the “Original Facility”) by entering into the Fourth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “Credit Agreement”). On the closing date, there were $180.5 million of term loans, $6.0 million of revolving loans outstanding under the Original Facility. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Original Facility was replaced with a $350 million revolving credit line with the option to increase the line by up to $150 million. The outstanding balances in the Original Facility were rolled into the Agreement on the date of entry. In addition, the maturity date of the loans under the Agreement was September 26, 2019. The credit facility allocates up to $20 million of the $350 million revolving credit line for the issuance of letters of credit, including certain existing letters of credit. At December 31, 2016, outstanding letters of credit totaled $1.1 million.
On January 13, 2016, the Company amended the Agreement to add a new lender and extend the maturity date of the credit facility from September 26, 2019 to January 13, 2021.
Covenants in the Agreement were modified to where the maximum permitted leverage ratio of funded debt to Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Agreement) is 3.5 to 1, increasing to 4.0 to 1 for up to two fiscal quarters following the closing of an acquisition permitted under the Agreement. The Company will pay interest on the unpaid principal amount of the facility at a rate equal to one-, three- or six-month LIBOR plus between 1.375% and 2.25% based upon the Company’s leverage ratio. The Company will also pay a commitment fee to the Lenders in an amount equal to between 0.175% and 0.35% on the undrawn portion of the credit facility, based upon the Company’s leverage ratio. The Company is required to maintain a minimum interest coverage ratio (Adjusted EBITDA to interest expense) of 3.0 to 1 for the term of the Agreement. The

27


Company’s interest coverage ratio was 29.5 to 1 at December 31, 2016. The Company’s leverage ratio was 1.38 to 1 at December 31, 2016. The Company is in compliance with all financial and other covenants at December 31, 2016.
In the event of voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy of the Company or any subsidiary, all unpaid principal and other amounts owing under the Agreement automatically become due and payable. Other events of default, such as failure to make payments as they become due and breach of financial and other covenants, give the Agent the option to declare all such amounts immediately due and payable.
The primary financing activities in 2016 related to net repayments on our senior facility of $19.0 million and $17.6 million in share repurchases under our Buyback Program, as further described below, using cash generated from operations. The primary financing activities in 2015 relate to borrowings on our senior credit facility to fund the acquisition of Armstrong and voluntary principal payments against our outstanding balance on the senior facility. We borrowed $50.0 million to fund the acquisition of Armstrong. During 2015, we made principal payments of $65.0 million on the senior credit facility, primarily using cash generated by operations. In February 2014, we borrowed $58.0 million to fund the acquisition of ATS. We also terminated our outstanding Industrial Revenue Bonds, which were repaid in full in November 2014 ($7.6 million).
The Company’s cash needs for working capital, debt service and capital equipment during 2017 is expected to be met by cash flows from operations and cash balances and, if necessary, utilization of the revolving credit facility.
On February 24, 2016, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $50 million of common stock (the “Buyback Program”). The Buyback Program allows the Company to purchase shares of its common stock in accordance with applicable securities laws on the open market or through privately negotiated transactions. The Buyback Program may be suspended or discontinued at any time. The timing and the amount of any repurchases will be determined based on an evaluation of market conditions, share price and other factors.
DIVIDENDS
Management believes that it should retain the capital generated from operating activities for investment in advancing technologies, acquisitions and debt retirement. Accordingly, there are no plans to institute a cash dividend program.
BACKLOG
At December 31, 2016, the Company’s backlog was approximately $258.0 million compared with approximately $274.4 million at December 31, 2015.
RELATED-PARTY TRANSACTIONS
Information regarding certain relationships and related transactions is incorporated herein by reference to the information included in the Company’s 2017 Proxy Statement which will be filed with the Commission within 120 days after the end of the Company’s 2016 fiscal year.
RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
See Note 1 of the Consolidated Financial Statements at Item 8 of this report.
ITEM 7A.
QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
The Company has limited exposure to fluctuation in Canadian and Euro currency exchange rates to the U.S. dollar. Over 90% of the Company’s consolidated sales are transacted in U.S. dollars.
Net assets held in or measured in Canadian dollars amounted to $9.3 million at December 31, 2016. Annual disbursements transacted in Canadian dollars were approximately $14.9 million in 2016. A 10% change in the value of the U.S. dollar versus the Canadian dollar would have had an insignificant impact to 2016 net income; however it could be significant in the future.
Net assets held in or measured in Euros amounted to $27.5 million at December 31, 2016. Disbursements transacted in Euros in 2016 were approximately $32.6 million. A 10% change in the value of the U.S. dollar versus the Euros would have had an insignificant impact to 2016 net income; however it could be significant in the future.

28


Risk due to fluctuation in interest rates is a function of the Company’s floating rate debt obligations, which total approximately $136.0 million at December 31, 2016. A change of 1% in interest rates of all variable rate debt would impact annual net income by approximately $0.9 million.

29


ITEM 8.
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Astronics Corporation

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Astronics Corporation as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016. Our audits also included the financial statement schedule listed in the Index at Item 15(a). These financial statements and schedule are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and schedule based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Astronics Corporation at December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles. Also, in our opinion, the related financial statement schedule, when considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Astronics Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) and our report dated February 23, 2017 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Buffalo, New York
February 23, 2017


30


MANAGEMENT’S REPORT ON INTERNAL CONTROL OVER FINANCIAL REPORTING
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting, as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) of the Exchange Act. Under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, we conducted an evaluation of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016 based upon the framework in Internal Control – Integrated Framework originally issued in 2013 by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Based on that evaluation, our management concluded that our internal control over financial reporting is effective as of December 31, 2016.
Ernst & Young LLP, independent registered public accounting firm, has audited our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and, as part of their audit, has issued their report, included herein, on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting.
 
By:
 
/s/ Peter J. Gundermann
 
February 23, 2017
 
 
 
Peter J. Gundermann
 
 
 
 
 
President & Chief Executive Officer
 
 
 
 
 
(Principal Executive Officer)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ David C. Burney
 
February 23, 2017
 
 
 
David C. Burney
 
 
 
 
 
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
 
 
 
 
 
(Principal Financial Officer)
 
 
 

31


REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Astronics Corporation

We have audited Astronics Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). Astronics Corporation’s management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.

We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

In our opinion, Astronics Corporation maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on the COSO criteria.

We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheets of Astronics Corporation as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income, shareholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016 of Astronics Corporation and our report dated February 23, 2017 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.

                

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Buffalo, New York
February 23, 2017


32


ASTRONICS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
 
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands, except per share data)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Sales
$
633,123

 
$
692,279

 
$
661,039

Cost of Products Sold
473,656

 
504,337

 
493,997

Gross Profit
159,467

 
187,942

 
167,042

Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
86,328

 
89,141

 
79,680

Income from Operations
73,139

 
98,801

 
87,362

Interest Expense, Net of Interest Income
4,354

 
4,751

 
8,255

Income Before Income Taxes
68,785

 
94,050

 
79,107

Provision for Income Taxes
20,361

 
27,076

 
22,937

Net Income
$
48,424

 
$
66,974

 
$
56,170

Basic Earnings Per Share
$
1.66

 
$
2.29

 
$
1.96

Diluted Earnings Per Share
$
1.61

 
$
2.22

 
$
1.87

See notes to consolidated financial statements.

33


ASTRONICS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
 
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Net Income
$
48,424

 
$
66,974

 
$
56,170

Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income:
 
 
 
 
 
Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments
(626
)
 
(4,617
)
 
(4,638
)
Mark to Market Adjustments for Derivatives – Net of Tax

 

 
69

Retirement Liability Adjustment – Net of Tax
196

 
1,502

 
(3,769
)
Other Comprehensive (Loss) Income
(430
)
 
(3,115
)
 
(8,338
)
Comprehensive Income
$
47,994

 
$
63,859

 
$
47,832

See notes to consolidated financial statements.

34


ASTRONICS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS
 
December 31,
(In thousands, except share and per share data)
2016
 
2015
ASSETS
 
 
 
Current Assets:
 
 
 
Cash and Cash Equivalents
$
17,901

 
$
18,561

Accounts Receivable, Net of Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
109,415

 
95,277

Inventories
116,597

 
115,467

Prepaid Expenses and Other Current Assets
11,160

 
20,662

Total Current Assets
255,073

 
249,967

Property, Plant and Equipment, at Cost:
 
 
 
Land
11,112

 
11,145

Buildings and Improvements
79,191

 
78,989

Machinery and Equipment
93,683

 
89,514

Construction in Progress
8,182

 
3,282

 
192,168

 
182,930

Less Accumulated Depreciation
69,356

 
58,188

Net Property, Plant and Equipment
122,812

 
124,742

Other Assets
13,149

 
10,889

Intangible Assets, Net of Accumulated Amortization
98,103

 
108,276

Goodwill
115,207

 
115,369

Total Assets
$
604,344

 
$
609,243

LIABILITIES AND SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
 
 
 
Current Liabilities:
 
 
 
Current Maturities of Long-term Debt
$
2,636

 
$
2,579

Accounts Payable
25,070

 
27,138

Accrued Payroll and Employee Benefits
24,743

 
24,036

Accrued Income Taxes
62

 
195

Other Accrued Expenses
10,881

 
11,527

Customer Advanced Payments and Deferred Revenue
23,168

 
38,757

Total Current Liabilities
86,560

 
104,232

Long-term Debt
145,484

 
167,210

Supplemental Retirement Plan and Other Liabilities for Pension Benefits
22,140

 
20,935

Other Liabilities
1,414

 
1,674

Deferred Income Taxes
11,297

 
14,967

Total Liabilities
266,895

 
309,018

Shareholders’ Equity:
 
 
 
Common Stock, $.01 par value, Authorized 40,000,000 Shares
21,955,414 Shares Issued and 21,432,282 Outstanding at December 31, 2016
19,348,678 Shares Issued and Outstanding at December 31, 2015
220

 
194

Convertible Class B Stock, $.01 par value, Authorized 10,000,000 Shares
7,665,437 Shares Issued and Outstanding at December 31, 2016
10,055,904 Shares Issued and Outstanding at December 31, 2015
77

 
100

Additional Paid-in Capital
64,752

 
57,827

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
(15,494
)
 
(15,064
)
Retained Earnings
305,512

 
257,168

Treasury Stock; 523,132 Shares in 2016
(17,618
)
 

Total Shareholders’ Equity
337,449

 
300,225

Total Liabilities and Shareholders’ Equity
$
604,344

 
$
609,243

See notes to consolidated financial statements.

35


ASTRONICS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
 
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
 
 
 
 
 
Net Income
$
48,424

 
$
66,974

 
$
56,170

Adjustments to Reconcile Net Income to Cash Provided By Operating Activities, Excluding the Effects of Acquisitions:
 
 
 
 
 
Depreciation and Amortization
25,790

 
25,309

 
27,254

Provision for Non-Cash Losses on Inventory and Receivables
2,404

 
3,187

 
1,959

Stock Compensation Expense
2,281

 
2,274

 
1,730

Deferred Tax Benefit
(4,756
)
 
(252
)
 
(4,677
)
Non-cash Adjustment to Contingent Consideration

 
(1,751
)
 
(4,971
)
Other
165

 
(294
)
 
268

Cash Flows from Changes in Operating Assets and Liabilities, net of the Effects from Acquisitions of Businesses:
 
 
 
 
 
Accounts Receivable
(14,622
)
 
(729
)
 
(18,850
)
Inventories
(2,671
)
 
(2,537
)
 
25,732

Prepaid Expenses and Other Current Assets
108

 
(799
)
 
(2,806
)
Accounts Payable
(2,000
)
 
(2,168
)
 
(8,005
)
Accrued Expenses
(174
)
 
3,738

 
6,826

Income Taxes Payable
7,926

 
(9,266
)
 
(4,084
)
Customer Advanced Payments and Deferred Revenue
(15,539
)
 
(7,485
)
 
22,055

Supplemental Retirement Plan and Other Liabilities
1,518

 
2,300

 
1,273

Cash Provided By Operating Activities
48,854

 
78,501

 
99,874

Cash Flows from Investing Activities
 
 
 
 
 
Acquisition of Business, Net of Cash Acquired

 
(52,276
)
 
(68,201
)
Capital Expenditures
(13,037
)
 
(18,641
)
 
(40,882
)
Other
(1,585
)
 
(2,669
)
 
(37
)
Cash Used For Investing Activities
(14,622
)
 
(73,586
)
 
(109,120
)
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
 
 
 
 
 
Proceeds From Long-term Debt
20,000

 
55,000

 
245,894

Principal Payments on Long-term Debt
(41,835
)
 
(67,694
)
 
(275,544
)
Purchase of Outstanding Shares for Treasury
(17,618
)
 

 

Debt Acquisition Costs

 

 
(573
)
Proceeds from Exercise of Stock Options
3,813

 
2,996

 
1,848

Excess Tax Benefit from Exercise of Stock Options
834

 
2,973

 
5,262

Cash Used For Financing Activities
(34,806
)
 
(6,725
)
 
(23,113
)
Effect of Exchange Rates on Cash
(86
)
 
(826
)
 
(1,079
)
Decrease in Cash and Cash Equivalents
(660
)
 
(2,636
)
 
(33,438
)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at Beginning of Year
18,561

 
21,197

 
54,635

Cash and Cash Equivalents at End of Year
$
17,901

 
$
18,561

 
$
21,197

Supplemental Cash Flow Information:
 
 
 
 
 
Interest Paid
$
4,536

 
$
4,734

 
$
7,816

Income Taxes Paid, Net of Refunds
$
15,898

 
$
32,990

 
$
26,619


See notes to consolidated financial statements.

36


ASTRONICS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
 
Year Ended December 31,
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Common Stock
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
$
194

 
$
166

 
$
133

Exercise of Stock Options and Stock Compensation Expense – Net of Taxes
1

 
2

 
2

Class B Stock Converted to Common Stock
25

 
26

 
31

End of Year
$
220

 
$
194

 
$
166

Convertible Class B Stock
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
$
100

 
$
124

 
$
152

Exercise of Stock Options and Stock Compensation Expense – Net of Taxes
2

 
2

 
3

Class B Stock Converted to Common Stock
(25
)
 
(26
)
 
(31
)
End of Year
$
77

 
$
100

 
$
124

Additional Paid in Capital
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
$
57,827

 
$
49,588

 
$
40,720

Exercise of Stock Options and Stock Compensation Expense - Net of Taxes
6,925

 
8,239

 
8,868

End of Year
$
64,752

 
$
57,827

 
$
49,588

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
$
(15,064
)
 
$
(11,949
)
 
$
(3,611
)
Foreign Currency Translation Adjustments
(626
)
 
(4,617
)
 
(4,638
)
Mark to Market Adjustments for Derivatives – Net of Taxes

 

 
69

Retirement Liability Adjustment – Net of Taxes
196

 
1,502

 
(3,769
)
End of Year
$
(15,494
)
 
$
(15,064
)
 
$
(11,949
)
Retained Earnings
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
$
257,168

 
$
190,248

 
$
134,115

Net income
48,424

 
66,974

 
56,170

Cash Paid in Lieu of Fractional Shares from Stock Distribution
(80
)
 
(54
)
 
(37
)
End of Year
$
305,512

 
$
257,168

 
$
190,248

Treasury Stock
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
$

 
$

 
$

Purchase of Shares
(17,618
)
 

 

Retirement of Treasury Shares

 

 

End of Year
$
(17,618
)
 
$

 
$

Total Shareholders’ Equity
$
337,449

 
$
300,225

 
$
228,177

See notes to consolidated financial statements
ASTRONICS CORPORATION
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY, COUNTINUED
 
Year Ended December 31,
(Share data, in thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Common Stock
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
19,349

 
16,608

 
13,268

Exercise of Stock Options
151

 
168

 
216

Class B Stock Converted to Common Stock
2,455

 
2,573

 
3,124

End of Year
21,955

 
19,349

 
16,608

Convertible Class B Stock
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year
10,055

 
12,447

 
15,287

Exercise of Stock Options
65

 
181

 
284

Class B Stock Converted to Common Stock
(2,455
)
 
(2,573
)
 
(3,124
)
End of Year
7,665

 
10,055

 
12,447

Treasury Stock
 
 
 
 
 
Beginning of Year

 

 

Purchase of Shares
523

 

 

End of Year
523

 

 

See notes to consolidated financial statements

37


NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
NOTE 1 — SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING PRINCIPLES AND PRACTICES
Description of the Business
Astronics Corporation (“Astronics” or the “Company”) is a leading supplier of products to the global aerospace, defense, electronics and semiconductor industries. Our products and services include advanced, high-performance electrical power generation, distribution and motion systems, lighting and safety systems, avionics products, systems certification, aircraft structures and automated test systems.
We have operations in the United States (“U.S.”), Canada and France. We design and build our products through our wholly owned subsidiaries Astronics Advanced Electronic Systems Corp. (“AES”); Astronics AeroSat Corporation (“AeroSat”); Armstrong Aerospace, Inc. (“Armstrong”); Astronics Test Systems, Inc. (“ATS”); Ballard Technology, Inc. (“Ballard”); Astronics DME LLC (“DME”); Luminescent Systems, Inc. (“LSI”); Luminescent Systems Canada, Inc. (“LSI Canada”); Max-Viz, Inc. (“Max-Viz”); Peco, Inc. (“Peco”); and PGA Electronic s.a. (“PGA”).
On January 14, 2015, the Company acquired 100% of the equity of Armstrong for approximately $52.3 million in cash. Armstrong, located in Itasca, Illinois, is a leading provider of engineering, design and certification solutions for commercial aircraft, specializing in connectivity, in-flight entertainment, and electrical power systems. Armstrong is included in our Aerospace segment.
At December 31, 2016, the Company has two reportable segments, Aerospace and Test Systems. The Aerospace segment designs and manufactures products for the global aerospace industry. Our Test Systems segment designs, develops, manufactures and maintains automated test systems that support the semiconductor, aerospace, communications and weapons test systems as well as training and simulation devices for both commercial and military applications.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its wholly owned subsidiaries. All intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.
Acquisitions are accounted for under the acquisition method and, accordingly, the operating results for the acquired companies are included in the consolidated statements of operations from the respective dates of acquisition.
For additional information on the acquired businesses, see Note 18.
Revenue Recognition
The vast majority of our sales agreements are for standard products and services, with revenue recognized on the accrual basis at the time of shipment of goods, transfer of title and customer acceptance, where required. There are no significant contracts allowing for right of return. To a limited extent, as a result of the acquisition of ATS, certain of our contracts involve multiple elements (such as equipment and service). Service revenues were not material for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014. The Company recognizes revenue for delivered elements when they have stand-alone value to the customer, they have been accepted by the customer, and for which there are only customary refund or return rights. Arrangement consideration is allocated to the deliverables by use of the relative selling price method. The selling price used for each deliverable is based on vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) if available, third party-evidence (“TPE”) if VSOE is not available, or estimated selling price if neither VSOE nor TPE is available. Estimated selling price is determined in a manner consistent with that used to establish the price to sell the deliverable on a standalone basis.
For prepaid service contracts, sales revenue is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the contract, unless historical evidence indicates the costs are incurred on other than a straight-line basis.
Revenue of approximately $20.7 million, $17.2 million and $2.7 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, was recognized from long-term, fixed-price contracts using the percentage-of-completion method of accounting, measured by multiplying the estimated total contract value by the ratio of actual contract costs incurred to date to the estimated total contract costs. The Company makes significant estimates involving its usage of percentage-of-completion accounting to recognize contract revenues. The Company periodically reviews contracts in process for estimates-to-completion, and revises estimated gross profit accordingly. While the Company believes its estimated gross profit on contracts in process is reasonable, unforeseen events and changes in circumstances can take place in a subsequent accounting period that may cause

38


the Company to revise its estimated gross profit on one or more of its contracts in process. Accordingly, the ultimate gross profit realized upon completion of such contracts can vary significantly from estimated amounts between accounting periods. For contracts with anticipated losses at completion, a charge is taken against income for the amount of the entire loss in the period in which it is estimated.
Cost of Products Sold, Engineering and Development and Selling, General and Administrative Expenses
Cost of products sold includes the costs to manufacture products such as direct materials and labor and manufacturing overhead as well as all engineering and developmental costs. The Company is engaged in a variety of engineering and design activities as well as basic research and development activities directed to the substantial improvement or new application of the Company’s existing technologies. These costs are expensed when incurred and included in cost of products sold. Research and development, design and related engineering amounted to $90.2 million in 2016, $90.1 million in 2015 and $76.7 million in 2014. Selling, general and administrative (“SG&A”) expenses include costs primarily related to our sales, marketing and administrative departments.
Shipping and Handling
Shipping and handling costs are expensed as incurred and are included in costs of products sold.
Stock Distribution
On September 26, 2016, the Company announced a three-for-twenty distribution of Class B Stock to holders of both Common and Class B Stock. Stockholders received three shares of Class B Stock for every twenty shares of Common and Class B Stock held on the record date of October 11, 2016. Fractional shares were paid in cash. All share quantities, share prices and per share data reported throughout this report have been adjusted to reflect the impact of this distribution.
Equity-Based Compensation
The Company accounts for its stock options following Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 718, Compensation – Stock Compensation (“ASC Topic 718”). This Topic requires all equity-based payments to employees, including grants of employee stock options, to be recognized in the statement of earnings based on the grant date fair value of the award. For awards with graded vesting, the Company uses a straight-line method of attributing the value of stock-based compensation expense, subject to minimum levels of expense, based on vesting.
Under ASC Topic 718, stock compensation expense recognized during the period is based on the value of the portion of share-based payment awards that is ultimately expected to vest during the period. Vesting requirements vary for directors, officers and key employees. In general, options granted to outside directors vest six months from the date of grant and options granted to officers and key employees vest with graded vesting over a five-year period, 20% each year, from the date of grant.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
All highly liquid instruments with a maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase are considered cash equivalents.
Accounts Receivable and Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
Accounts receivable are composed of trade and contract receivables recorded at either the invoiced amount or costs in excess of billings, are expected to be collected within one year, and do not bear interest. The Company will record a valuation allowance to account for potentially uncollectible accounts receivable. The allowance is determined based on our knowledge of the business, specific customers, review of the receivables’ aging and a specific identification of accounts where collection is at risk. Account balances are charged against the allowance after all means of collections have been exhausted and recovery is considered remote. The Company typically does not require collateral.
Inventories
Inventories are stated at the lower of cost or market, cost being determined in accordance with the first-in, first-out method or standard cost. The Company records valuation reserves to provide for excess, slow moving or obsolete inventory. In determining the appropriate reserve, the Company considers the age of inventory on hand, the overall inventory levels in relation to forecasted demands as well as reserving for specifically identified inventory that the Company believes is no longer salable.

39


Property, Plant and Equipment
Depreciation of property, plant and equipment is computed using the straight-line method for financial reporting purposes and using accelerated methods for income tax purposes. Estimated useful lives of the assets are as follows: buildings, 25-40 years; machinery and equipment, 4-10 years. Leased buildings and associated leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the terms of the lease or the estimated useful lives of the assets, with the amortization of such assets included within depreciation expense.
The cost of properties sold or otherwise disposed of and the accumulated depreciation thereon are eliminated from the accounts and the resulting gain or loss, as well as maintenance and repair expenses, is reflected in income. Replacements and improvements are capitalized.
Depreciation expense was approximately $14.3 million, $13.3 million and $10.6 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Buildings acquired under capital leases amounted to $10.5 million ($14.3 million, net of $3.8 million of accumulated amortization) and $12.3 million ($14.8 million, net of $2.5 million accumulated amortization) at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Future minimum lease payments associated with these capital leases are expected to be $2.6 million in 2017, $2.6 million in 2018, $2.0 million in 2019, $2.1 million in 2020 and $2.2 million in 2021.
Long-Lived Assets
Long-lived assets to be held and used are initially recorded at cost. The carrying value of these assets is evaluated for recoverability whenever adverse effects or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. Impairments are recognized if future undiscounted cash flows from operations are not expected to be sufficient to recover long-lived assets. The carrying amounts are then reduced to fair value, which is typically determined by using a discounted cash flow model.
Goodwill
The Company tests goodwill at the reporting unit level on an annual basis or more frequently if an event occurs or circumstances change that would more likely than not reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. The Company has ten reporting units, however only eight reporting units have goodwill and were subject to the goodwill impairment test. The annual testing date for the impairment test is as of the first day of our fourth quarter.
We may elect to perform a qualitative assessment that considers economic, industry and company-specific factors for all or selected reporting units. If, after completing the assessment, it is determined that it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying value, we proceed to a quantitative test. We may also elect to perform a quantitative test instead of a qualitative test for any or all of our reporting units.
Quantitative testing requires a comparison of the fair value of each reporting unit to its carrying value. We use the discounted cash flow method to estimate the fair value of our reporting units. The discounted cash flow method incorporates various assumptions, the most significant being projected revenue growth rates, operating margins and cash flows, the terminal growth rate and the weighted average cost of capital. If the carrying value of the reporting unit exceeds its fair value, goodwill is considered impaired and any loss must be measured. To determine the amount of the impairment loss, the implied fair value of goodwill is determined by assigning a fair value to all of the reporting unit’s assets and liabilities, including any unrecognized intangible assets, as if the reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination at fair value. If the carrying amount of the reporting unit goodwill exceeds the implied fair value of that goodwill, an impairment loss would be recognized in an amount equal to that excess.
There were no impairment charges in 2016, 2015 or 2014.
Intangible Assets
Acquired intangibles are generally valued based upon future economic benefits such as earnings and cash flows. Acquired identifiable intangible assets are recorded at fair value and are amortized over their estimated useful lives. Acquired intangible assets with an indefinite life are not amortized, but are reviewed for impairment at least annually or more frequently whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of those assets are below their estimated fair values.

40


Impairment is tested under ASC Topic 350, Intangibles - Goodwill and Other, as amended by Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2012-2, by first performing a qualitative analysis in a manner similar to the testing methodology of goodwill discussed previously. The qualitative factors applied under this new provision indicated no impairment to the Company’s indefinite lived intangible assets in 2016, 2015 or 2014.
Financial Instruments
The Company’s financial instruments consist primarily of cash and cash equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, notes payable and long-term debt. The Company performs periodic credit evaluations of its customers’ financial condition and generally does not require collateral. The Company does not hold or issue financial instruments for trading purposes. Due to their short-term nature, the carrying values of cash and equivalents, accounts receivable, accounts payable, and notes payable approximate fair value. The carrying value of the Company’s variable rate long-term debt instruments also approximates fair value due to the variable rate feature of these instruments.
Derivatives
The accounting for changes in the fair value of derivatives depends on the intended use and resulting designation. The Company’s use of derivative instruments was limited to cash flow hedges for interest rate risk associated with long-term debt. All such instruments were terminated in 2014. Interest rate swaps were used to adjust the proportion of total debt that is subject to variable and fixed interest rates. The interest rate swaps were designated as hedges of the amount of future cash flows related to interest payments on variable-rate debt that, in combination with the interest payments on the debt, converted a portion of the variable-rate debt to fixed-rate debt. The Company recorded all derivatives on the balance sheet at fair value. The related gains or losses, to the extent the derivatives were effective as a hedge, were deferred in shareholders’ equity as a component of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (“AOCI”) and reclassified into earnings at the time interest expense was recognized on the associated long-term debt. Any ineffectiveness was recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, the disclosure of contingent liabilities and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting periods in the financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
Foreign Currency Translation
The Company accounts for its foreign currency translation in accordance with ASC Topic 830, Foreign Currency Translation. The aggregate transaction gain included in operations was insignificant in 2016, $1.0 million in 2015 and insignificant in 2014.
Dividends
The Company has not paid any cash dividends in the three-year period ended December 31, 2016.
Loss Contingencies
Loss contingencies may from time to time arise from situations such as claims and other legal actions. Loss contingencies are recorded as liabilities when it is probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable. Disclosure is required when there is a reasonable possibility that the ultimate loss will exceed the recorded provision. Contingent liabilities are often resolved over long time periods. In recording liabilities for probable losses, management is required to make estimates and judgments regarding the amount or range of the probable loss. Management continually assesses the adequacy of estimated loss contingencies and, if necessary, adjusts the amounts recorded as better information becomes known.
Acquisitions
The Company accounts for its acquisitions under ASC Topic 805, Business Combinations and Reorganizations (“ASC Topic 805”). ASC Topic 805 provides guidance on how the acquirer recognizes and measures the consideration transferred, identifiable assets acquired, liabilities assumed, non-controlling interests, and goodwill acquired in a business combination. ASC Topic 805 also expands required disclosures surrounding the nature and financial effects of business combinations. See Note 18 regarding the acquisitions in 2015 and 2014.

41


Newly Adopted and Recent Accounting Pronouncements
In May 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2014-9, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This new standard is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, pursuant to the issuance of ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Deferral of Effective Date issued in August 2015. The comprehensive new standard will supersede existing revenue recognition guidance and require revenue to be recognized when promised goods or services are transferred to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. Adoption of the new rules could affect the timing of revenue recognition for certain transactions. The guidance permits two implementation approaches, one requiring retrospective application of the new standard with restatement of prior years and one requiring prospective application of the new standard with disclosure of results under old standards. The Company will adopt the new standard on January 1, 2018, using the modified retrospective transition method.
The adoption of this amendment may require us to accelerate the recognition of revenue as compared to current standards, for certain customers, in cases where we produce products unique to those customers; and for which we would have an enforceable right of payment for production completed to date. The Company has identified its revenue streams, reviewed the initial impacts of adopting the new standard on those revenue streams, and appointed a project management leader. The Company continues to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative impacts of the standard.
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016 - 02, Leases. The new standard is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted. The standard will require lessees to report most leases as assets and liabilities on the balance sheet, while lessor accounting will remain substantially unchanged. The standard requires a modified retrospective transition approach for existing leases, whereby the new rules will be applied to the earliest year presented.  The adoption of the standard is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-09, Improvements to Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting. The new standard is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 and early adoption is permitted. With respect to income taxes, under current guidance, when a share-based payment award such as a stock option is granted to an employee, the fair value of the award is generally recognized over the vesting period. However, the related deduction from taxes payable is based on the award’s intrinsic value at the time of exercise, which can be either greater (creating an excess tax benefit) or less (creating a tax deficiency) than the compensation cost recognized in the financial statements. Excess tax benefits are currently recognized in additional paid-in capital (“APIC”) within equity, deficiencies are first recorded to APIC to the extent previously recognized excess tax benefits exist, after which time deficiencies are recorded to income tax expense. Under the new guidance, all excess tax benefits/deficiencies would be recognized as income tax benefit/expense in the statement of income. The new ASU’s income tax aspects also impact the calculation of diluted earnings per share by excluding excess tax benefits/deficiencies from the calculation of assumed proceeds available to repurchase shares under the treasury stock method. Relative to forfeitures, the new standard provides an accounting policy election to account for forfeitures as they occur. Additionally, cash flows related to excess tax benefits will be included in Net cash provided by operating activities and will no longer be separately classified as a financing activity. Finally, the new ASU also allows a company to repurchase more of an employee’s shares for tax withholding purposes. The Company will adopt the new standard on January 1, 2017, and will account for forfeitures as they occur.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments, which is intended to reduce diversity in practice in how certain cash receipts and payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The standard provides guidance in a number of situations including, among others, settlement of zero-coupon bonds, contingent consideration payments made after a business combination, proceeds from the settlement of insurance claims, and distributions received from equity method investees. The ASU also provides guidance for classifying cash receipts and payments that have aspects of more than one class of cash flows. This ASU is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, with early adoption permitted. The standard requires application using a retrospective transition method. This ASU is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-01, Clarifying the Definition of a Business, which narrows the existing definition of a business and provides a framework for evaluating whether a transaction should be accounted for as an acquisition (or disposal) of assets or a business. The ASU requires an entity to evaluate if substantially all of the fair value of the gross assets acquired is concentrated in a single identifiable asset or a group of similar identifiable assets; if so, the set of transferred assets and activities (collectively, the set) is not a business. To be considered a business, the set would need to include an input and a substantive process that together significantly contribute to the ability to create outputs. The standard also narrows the definition of outputs. The definition of a business affects areas of accounting such as acquisitions, disposals and goodwill. Under the new guidance, fewer acquired sets are expected to be considered businesses. This ASU is effective for

42


fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 on a prospective basis with early adoption permitted. The Company would apply this guidance to applicable transactions after the adoption date.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment. Under the new standard, goodwill impairment would be measured as the amount by which a reporting unit’s carrying value exceeds its fair value, not to exceed the carrying value of goodwill. This ASU eliminates existing guidance that requires an entity to determine goodwill impairment by calculating the implied fair value of goodwill by hypothetically assigning the fair value of a reporting unit to all of its assets and liabilities as if that reporting unit had been acquired in a business combination. This ASU is effective prospectively to annual and interim impairment tests beginning after December 15, 2019, with early adoption permitted. The Company plans to early adopt on January 1, 2017.
NOTE 2 — ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE
Accounts receivable at December 31 consists of:
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
Trade Accounts Receivable
$
93,823

 
$
87,282

Unbilled Recoverable Costs and Accrued Profits
16,194

 
8,307

Total Receivables
110,017

 
95,589

Less Allowance for Doubtful Accounts
(602
)
 
(312
)
 
$
109,415


$
95,277

NOTE 3 — INVENTORIES
Inventories at December 31 are as follows:
(In thousands)
2016

2015
Finished Goods
$
28,792

 
$
27,770

Work in Progress
20,790

 
23,977

Raw Material
67,015

 
63,720

 
$
116,597

 
$
115,467

At December 31, 2016, the Company’s reserve for inventory valuation was $15.4 million, or 11.7% of gross inventory. At December 31, 2015, the Company’s reserve for inventory valuation was $14.6 million, or 11.2% of gross inventory.
NOTE 4 — INTANGIBLE ASSETS
The following table summarizes acquired intangible assets as follows:
 
 
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
(In thousands)
Weighted
Average Life
 
Gross Carrying
Amount
 
Accumulated
Amortization
 
Gross Carrying
Amount
 
Accumulated
Amortization
Patents
4 Years
 
$
2,146

 
$
1,450

 
$
2,146

 
$
1,264

Noncompete Agreement
3 Years
 
2,500

 
979

 
2,500

 
479

Trade Names
7 Years
 
10,189

 
3,153

 
10,217

 
2,216

Completed and Unpatented Technology
6 Years
 
24,118

 
9,221

 
24,056

 
6,795

Backlog
-
 
11,224

 
11,224

 
11,202

 
10,793

Customer Relationships
12 Years
 
97,046

 
23,093

 
96,472

 
16,770

Total Intangible Assets
6 Years
 
$
147,223

 
$
49,120

 
$
146,593

 
$
38,317

Amortization is computed on the straight-line method for financial reporting purposes, with the exception of backlog, which is amortized based on the expected realization period of the acquired backlog. Amortization expense for intangibles was $10.8 million, $11.3 million and $15.8 million for 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

43


Based upon acquired intangible assets at December 31, 2016, amortization expense for each of the next five years is estimated to be:
(In thousands)
 
2017
$
10,445

2018
10,133

2019
9,754

2020
9,198

2021
9,152

NOTE 5 — GOODWILL
The following table summarizes the changes in the carrying amount of goodwill for 2016 and 2015:
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
Balance at Beginning of the Year
$
115,369

 
$
100,153

Acquisition

 
16,237

Foreign Currency Translations and Other
(162
)
 
(1,021
)
Balance at End of the Year
$
115,207

 
$
115,369

 
 
 
 
Goodwill - Gross
$
131,749

 
$
131,911

Accumulated Impairment Losses
(16,542
)
 
(16,542
)
Goodwill - Net
$
115,207

 
$
115,369

As discussed in Note 1, goodwill is not amortized but is periodically tested for impairment. For the eight reporting units with goodwill on the first day of our fourth quarter, the Company performed a quantitative assessment of the goodwill’s carrying value. The assessment indicated no impairment to the carrying value of goodwill in any of the Company’s reporting units and no impairment charge was recognized. There was no impairment to the carrying value of goodwill in 2015 or 2014. All goodwill relates to the Aerospace segment.
NOTE 6 — LONG-TERM DEBT AND NOTES PAYABLE
Long-term debt consists of the following:
(In thousands)
 
 
2016
 
2015
Revolving Credit Line issued under the Fourth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement dated September 26, 2014. Interest is at LIBOR plus between 1.375% and 2.25% (2.27% at December 31, 2016).
$
136,000

 
$
155,000

Other Bank Debt
1,270

 
1,963

Capital Lease Obligations
10,850

 
12,826

 
148,120

 
169,789

Less Current Maturities
2,636

 
2,579

 
$
145,484

 
$
167,210












44


Principal maturities of long-term debt are approximately:
(In thousands)
 
2017
$
2,636

2018
2,610

2019
1,835

2020
2,096

2021
138,049

Thereafter
894

 
$
148,120

The Company’s obligations under the Credit Agreement as amended are jointly and severally guaranteed by each domestic subsidiary of the Company other than a non-material subsidiary. The obligations are secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of the Company’s and the guarantors’ assets.
The Company's Third Amended and Restated Credit Agreement provided for a $75 million five-year revolving credit facility and a $190 million five-year term loan, both expiring on June 30, 2018. The facilities carried an interest rate of LIBOR plus between 2.25% and 3.50%, depending on the Company’s leverage ratio as defined in the Credit Agreement. In addition, the Company was required to pay a commitment fee of between 0.25% and 0.50% on the unused portion of the total credit commitment for the preceding quarter, based on the Company’s leverage ratio under the credit agreement.
On February 28, 2014, in connection with the funding of the acquisition of ATS, the Company amended its existing credit facility to exercise its option to increase the revolving credit commitment. The credit agreement provided for a $125 million, five-year revolving credit facility maturing on June 30, 2018, of which $58.0 million was drawn to finance the acquisition. In addition, the Company was required to pay a commitment fee quarterly at a rate of between 0.25% and 0.50% per annum on the unused portion of the total revolving credit commitment, based on the Company’s leverage ratio.
On September 26, 2014, the Company modified and extended its existing credit facility (the “Original Facility”) by entering into the Fourth Amended and Restated Credit Agreement (the “Credit Agreement”). On the closing date, there were $180.5 million of term loans outstanding and $6 million of revolving loans outstanding under the Original Facility. Pursuant to the Agreement, the Original Facility was replaced with a $350 million revolving credit line with the option to increase the line by up to $150 million. The outstanding balances in the Original Facility were rolled into the Agreement on the date of entry. In addition, the maturity date of the loans under the Agreement was extended to September 26, 2019. The credit facility allocates up to $20 million of the $350 million revolving credit line for the issuance of letters of credit, including certain existing letters of credit. At December 31, 2016, outstanding letters of credit totaled $1.1 million.
On January 13, 2016, the Company amended the Agreement to add a new lender and extend the maturity date of the credit facility from September 26, 2019 to January 13, 2021.
Covenants in the Agreement were modified to where the maximum permitted leverage ratio of funded debt to Adjusted EBITDA (as defined in the Agreement) is 3.5 to 1, increasing to 4.0 to 1 for up to two fiscal quarters following the closing of an acquisition permitted under the Agreement. The Company will pay interest on the unpaid principal amount of the facility at a rate equal to one-, three- or six-month LIBOR plus between 1.375% and 2.25% based upon the Company’s leverage ratio. The Company will also pay a commitment fee to the Lenders in an amount equal to between 0.175% and 0.35% on the undrawn portion of the credit facility, based upon the Company’s leverage ratio. The Company is required to maintain a minimum interest coverage ratio (Adjusted EBITDA to interest expense) of 3.0 to 1 for the term of the Agreement. The Company’s interest coverage ratio was 29.5 to 1 at December 31, 2016. The Company’s leverage ratio was 1.38 to 1 at December 31, 2016. The Company is in compliance with all financial and other covenants at December 31, 2016.
In the event of voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy of the Company or any subsidiary, all unpaid principal and other amounts owing under the Credit Agreement automatically become due and payable. Other events of default, such as failure to make payments as they become due and breach of financial and other covenants, change of control, judgments over a certain amount, and cross default under other agreements give the Agent the option to declare all such amounts immediately due and payable.


45


NOTE 7 — WARRANTY
In the ordinary course of business, the Company warrants its products against defects in design, materials and workmanship typically over periods ranging from twelve to sixty months. The Company determines warranty reserves needed by product line based on experience and current facts and circumstances. Activity in the warranty accrual, which is included in other accrued expenses on the Consolidated Balance Sheets, is summarized as follows:
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Balance at Beginning of the Year
$
5,741

 
$
4,884

 
$
2,796

Warranty Liabilities Acquired

 
500

 
564

Warranties Issued
2,281

 
4,039

 
3,431

Reassessed Warranty Exposure
(966
)
 
(485
)
 
(34
)
Warranties Settled
(2,381
)
 
(3,197
)
 
(1,873
)
Balance at End of the Year
$
4,675

 
$
5,741

 
$
4,884

NOTE 8 — INCOME TAXES
The Company recognizes deferred tax assets and liabilities for the expected future tax consequences of temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax basis of assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets are reduced, if deemed necessary, by a valuation allowance for the amount of tax benefits which are not expected to be realized. Investment tax credits are recognized on the flow through method.
The provision (benefit) for income taxes consists of the following:
(In thousands)
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Current
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. Federal
$
21,667

 
$
24,809

 
$
22,705

State
2,899

 
</