Print Page  |  Close Window

Sensata Technologies Holding N.V.'s SEC Filings

S-1/A
SENSATA TECHNOLOGIES HOLDING PLC filed this Form S-1/A on 03/09/2010
Entire Document
 


Table of Contents

gains of $120.1 million resulting from the extinguishment of debt, net gains of $2.6 million associated with our commodity forward contracts and net currency gains of $0.3 million resulting from the re-measurement of net monetary assets denominated in foreign currencies. Currency translation gain/(loss) and other, net for fiscal year 2009 also includes currency losses of $(13.6) million resulting from the re-measurement of our foreign currency denominated debt and an impairment loss of $(1.7) million associated with our manufacturing facilities classified as held for sale.

 

Currency translation gain/(loss) and other, net for fiscal year 2008 consists primarily of currency gains of $53.2 million resulting from the re-measurement of our foreign currency denominated debt and gains of $15.0 million resulting from the extinguishment of debt, offset by losses of $(8.3) million associated with our commodity forward contracts and net currency losses of $(5.0) million resulting from the re-measurement of net monetary assets denominated in foreign currencies.

 

Provision for income taxes

 

Provision for income taxes for fiscal years 2009 and 2008 totaled $43.0 million and $53.5 million, respectively. Our tax provision consists of current tax expense which relates primarily to our profitable operations in foreign tax jurisdictions and deferred tax expense which relates primarily to amortization of tax deductible goodwill. Several factors contributed to the decrease in our income tax provision for fiscal year 2009 as compared to fiscal year 2008 including the composition of income and loss among jurisdictions, year-to-date earnings and a tax benefit related to the goodwill impairment recorded during the three months ended March 31, 2009.

 

Loss from discontinued operations

 

Loss from discontinued operations for fiscal years 2009 and 2008 totaled $0.4 million and $20.1 million, respectively.

 

Year Ended December 31, 2008 (“fiscal year 2008”) Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2007 (“fiscal year 2007”)

 

Net revenue

 

Net revenue for fiscal year 2008 increased $19.4 million, or 1.4%, to $1,422.7 million from $1,403.3 million for fiscal year 2007. Net revenue increased 6.5% due to the acquisition of Airpax and 1.7% due to the favorable foreign currency exchange rates, primarily the U.S. dollar to Euro exchange rate. The increase in net revenue was partially offset by a 4.5% reduction due to volume, primarily in the controls business, pricing declines of 1.3% that are customary in our industry and a 1.0% reduction in net revenue associated with a settlement with a customer as described below. Net revenue excluding the effect of the Airpax acquisition would have decreased $72.0 million, or 5.1%.

 

Sensors business segment net revenue for fiscal year 2008 decreased $15.1 million, or 1.7%, to $867.4 million from $882.5 million for fiscal year 2007. Net revenue decreased due to a 2.1% reduction in pricing, a 1.6% reduction due to a charge associated with a settlement with a customer, and 1.2% due to lower volumes. The decline in net revenue was partially offset by an increase in revenue of 2.1% due to favorable foreign currency exchange rates, primarily the U.S. dollar to Euro exchange rate, and 1.1% due to the acquisition of Airpax. The volume declined in the Americas primarily due to weakness in the U.S. automotive end-market and the economy overall. In the fourth quarter of 2008, the declining economies in Europe and Asia also began to have an impact. The reduction in pricing is primarily due to incentives inherent in long-term customer agreements. A significant automotive customer alleged defects in certain of our pressure sensor products used in its product which is installed in automobiles. The customer claimed to have incurred costs to recall and repair certain of the systems in these automobiles. We contested its allegations believing the issue was caused by the customer’s failure to apply our product in accordance with product specifications. In 2008, however, we decided

 

60