XML 33 R7.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT  v2.3.0.11
Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
 6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2011
Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies [Abstract]  
Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
Note 1: Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies
In the opinion of management, the accompanying consolidated financial statements of Universal Electronics Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries contain all the adjustments necessary for a fair presentation of financial position, results of operations and cash flows for the periods presented. All such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature and certain reclassifications have been made to prior year amounts in order to conform to the current year presentation. Information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements, which are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission. As used herein, the terms “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Universal Electronics Inc. and its subsidiaries, unless the context indicates to the contrary.
Our results of operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2011 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the “Risk Factors,” “Management Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations,” “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk,” and the “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” and notes thereto included in Items 1A, 7, 7A, and 8, respectively, of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.
Estimates, Judgments and Assumptions
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. On an on-going basis, we evaluate our estimates, judgments and assumptions, including those related to revenue recognition, allowance for sales returns and doubtful accounts, warranties, inventory valuation, business combination purchase price allocations, impairment of long-lived assets, intangible assets and goodwill, income taxes, accrued compensation and stock-based compensation expense. Actual results may differ from our expectations. Based on our evaluation, our estimates, judgments and assumptions may be adjusted as more information becomes available. Any adjustment may be material.
See Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 for a summary of our significant accounting policies.
New Accounting Pronouncements
In June 2011, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2011-05, “Presentation of Comprehensive Income.” ASU 2011-05 eliminates the option to report other comprehensive income and its components in the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity and requires an entity to present the total of comprehensive income, the components of net income and the components of other comprehensive income either in a single continuous statement or in two separate but consecutive statements. This pronouncement is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those years, beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2011-05 concerns presentation and disclosure only and will not have an impact on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-04, “Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”).” This pronouncement was issued to provide a consistent definition of fair value and ensure that the fair value measurement and disclosure requirements are similar between U.S. GAAP and IFRS. ASU 2011-04 changes certain fair value measurement principles and enhances the disclosure requirements particularly for level 3 fair value measurements.
This pronouncement is effective for reporting periods beginning on or after December 15, 2011. The adoption of ASU 2011-04 is not expected to have a significant impact to our consolidated financial position or results of operations.
Recently Adopted Accounting Pronouncements
During January 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-6 to improve the disclosure and transparency of fair value measurements. These amendments clarify the level of disaggregation required, and the necessary disclosures about the valuation techniques and inputs used to measure fair value for both recurring and nonrecurring fair value measurements. The amendments in the update are effective prospectively for interim and annual periods beginning on or after December 15, 2009, except for the separate disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements relating to Level 3 measurements, which are effective for fiscal years beginning on or after December 15, 2010, and for interim periods within those fiscal years. We adopted the portion of this ASU that was effective beginning on or after December 15, 2010, beginning January 1, 2011. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
During December 2010, the FASB issued ASU No. 2010-29 to address diversity in practice regarding the interpretation of the pro forma revenue and earnings disclosure requirements for business combinations. ASC 805- 10-50-2(h) requires a public entity to disclose pro forma information for business combinations that occurred during the current annual reporting period. The disclosures include combined pro forma revenue and earnings as though the acquisition date for all business combinations during the year had been as of the beginning of the annual reporting period. If comparative financial statements are presented, the pro forma revenue and earnings of the combined entity should be reported as though the acquisition date for all business combinations that occurred during the current year had been as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period. In practice, some preparers have presented the pro forma information in their comparative financial statements as if the business combination that occurred in the current reporting period had occurred as of the beginning of each of the current and prior annual reporting periods. Other preparers have disclosed the pro forma information as if the business combination occurred at the beginning of the prior annual reporting period only, and carried forward the related adjustments, if applicable, through the current reporting period. The amendments in this update specify that if a public entity presents comparative financial statements, the entity should disclose revenue and earnings of the combined entity as though the business combination(s) that occurred during the current year had occurred as of the beginning of the comparable prior annual reporting period only. The amendments in this update also expand the supplemental pro forma disclosures under Topic 805 to include a description of the nature and amount of material, nonrecurring pro forma adjustments directly attributable to the business combination included in the reported pro forma revenue and earnings. The amendments in this update are effective prospectively for business combinations for which the acquisition date is on or after the beginning of the first annual reporting period beginning on or after December 15, 2010. We adopted this ASU beginning January 1, 2011. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-14 to address accounting for arrangements that contain tangible products and software. The amendments in this update clarify what guidance should be utilized in allocating and measuring revenue for products that contain software that is “more than incidental” to the product as a whole. Currently, products that contain software that is “more than incidental” to the product as a whole are within the scope of software accounting guidance. Software accounting guidance requires a vendor to use vendor-specific objective evidence (“VSOE”) of selling price to separate the software from the product and account for the two elements as a multiple-element arrangement. A vendor must sell, or intend to sell, a particular element separately to assert VSOE for that element. Third-party evidence for selling price is not allowed under the software accounting model. If a vendor does not have VSOE for the undelivered elements in the arrangement, the revenue associated with both the delivered and undelivered elements is combined into one unit of accounting. Any revenue attributable to the delivered elements is then deferred and recognized at a later date, which in many cases is as the undelivered elements are delivered by the vendor. This ASU addresses concerns that the current accounting model may not appropriately reflect the economics of the underlying transactions because no revenue is recognized for some products for which the vendor has already completed the related performance. In addition, this ASU addresses the concern that more software enabled products fall within the scope of the current software accounting model than was originally intended because of ongoing technical advancements. The amendments in the update are effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. We adopted this ASU beginning January 1, 2011. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.
In October 2009, the FASB issued ASU No. 2009-13 to address the accounting for multiple-deliverable arrangements to enable vendors to account for products or services (deliverables) separately rather than as a combined accounting unit. Current accounting guidance requires a vendor to use VSOE or third-party evidence (“TPE”) of selling price to separate deliverables in a multiple-deliverable arrangement. VSOE of selling price is the price charged for a deliverable when it is sold separately or, for a deliverable not yet being sold separately, the price established by management with the appropriate authority. If a vendor does not have VSOE for the undelivered elements in the arrangement, the revenue associated with both the delivered and undelivered elements is combined into one unit of accounting. Any revenue attributable to the delivered products is then deferred and recognized at a later date, which in many cases is as the undelivered elements are delivered by the vendor. An exception to this guidance exists if the vendor has VSOE or TPE of selling price for the undelivered elements in the arrangement but not for the delivered elements. In those situations, the vendor uses the residual value method to allocate revenue to the delivered element, which results in the allocation of the entire discount in the arrangement, if any, to the delivered element. This ASU addresses concerns that the current accounting model may not appropriately reflect the economics of the underlying transactions because sometimes no revenue is recognized for products for which the vendor has already completed the related performance. As a result of this amendment, multiple element arrangements will be separated into multiple units of accounting in more circumstances than under the existing accounting model. This amendment establishes a selling price hierarchy for determining the selling price of a deliverable. The selling price utilized for each deliverable will be based on VSOE if available, TPE if VSOE is not available, or estimated selling price if neither VSOE or TPE evidence is available. The residual method is eliminated. The amendments in the update are effective prospectively for revenue arrangements entered into or materially modified in fiscal years beginning on or after June 15, 2010. We adopted this ASU beginning January 1, 2011. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material effect on our consolidated results of operations and financial condition.