Commitments and Contingencies	12 Months Ended
Mar. 31, 2024
Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]
Commitments and Contingencies	17. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES Environmental Matters Certain of the Company's current or former operations and facilities are subject to a number of federal, state, local and foreign environmental laws and regulations. In August 2023, a panel of three arbitrators made an interim decision in an ongoing arbitration between Triumph Aerostructures, LLC (“TAS”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, and Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation (“Northrop”) related to ongoing future responsibility for environmental remediation costs at four formerly occupied properties that had been previously operated by Northrop. Although the interim decision indicated that TAS would have certain ongoing responsibility for remediation at the properties, neither the agreement nor the interim decision provides a mechanism for the transfer of remediation responsibilities to TAS. While the parties continue to dispute liability for remediation, from a regulatory perspective, TAS is not a party to any regulatory order for three of the four properties, although TAS, along with Northrop, is party to the regulatory order for the fourth property. Approximately $1,300 has been accrued as a legal judgment loss and is management's best estimate of the remediation costs at the fourth property. While final resolution of this matter remains uncertain, the ultimate impact on operations could be in the range of a loss of up to $39,000, with such loss resulting in annual cash expenditures not likely to exceed $2,000 to $3,000 in a given year. In March 2024, the panel of arbitrators made a second interim decision in the arbitration between TAS and Northrop indicating that although TAS had responsibility for certain remediation costs at the four formerly occupied properties that had been already incurred by Northrop, the panel was unable to affix an amount of damages to Northrop for those costs and asked the parties to meet and confer regarding those damages. Northrop had indicated during the second phase of the arbitration that it believed its damages incurred through December 31, 2023 to be approximately $12,000, however, Northrop did not substantiate its damages. TAS maintains that Northrop has not proven its damages after opportunity to do so in the second phase of the arbitration. The Company has accrued a liability of approximately $6,000 as a result of the second interim decision which is included within legal contingencies loss on the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended March 31, 2024. It is anticipated that further action by the panel will occur in fiscal 2025. TAS intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter, including potentially seeking to set aside any adverse decision from the arbitration panel. Commercial Disputes and Litigation Throughout the course of the Company’s programs, disputes with suppliers or customers could and have arisen regarding unique contractual requirements, quality, costs or impacts to production schedules. If the Company is unable to successfully and equitably resolve such claims and assertions, its business, financial condition, results of operations, customer relationships and related transactions could be materially adversely affected. In the ordinary course of business, the Company is involved in other disputes, claims and lawsuits with employees, suppliers and customers, as well as governmental and regulatory inquiries, that it deems to be immaterial. Some may involve claims or potential claims of substantial damages, fines, penalties or injunctive relief. While the Company cannot predict the outcome of any pending or future litigation or proceeding and no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that any pending matter will have a material effect, individually or in the aggregate, on its financial position or results of operations. Divestitures, Disposals, Guarantees, and Indemnifications As disclosed in Note 3, we have engaged in a number of divestitures. In connection with divestitures and related transactions, the Company from time to time has indemnified and has been indemnified by third parties against certain liabilities that may arise in connection with, among other things, business activities prior to the completion of the respective transactions. The term of these indemnifications, which typically pertain to environmental, tax and product liabilities, is generally indefinite. As of March 31, 2024, no indemnification assets or liabilities have been recorded. As it relates to certain divestitures, disputes have arisen or may continue to arise between the Company and the acquirer subsequent to the completion and closing of the divestiture transaction. Such disputes have included or may include amounts payable to or from the buyer for closing working capital adjustments to the purchase price as well as claims regarding alleged violations of contractual terms, representations, and warranties of the sale agreements, among other matters. The outcome of such disputes typically involve negotiations between the Company and the acquirer, but could also lead to litigation between the parties, including as disclosed further below, and the ultimate claims made by the parties against each other could be material. As of March 31, 2024, we have accrued for our estimate of probable losses associated with such disputes, but losses in excess of those currently accrued could be incurred and may be material. The Company has received notification of claims which allege certain bases for indemnification and damages relating to certain divestitures. The relevant agreements generally contain limits on certain damages that may be payable under the relevant agreements. For example, the divestiture agreement relating to the sale of the Red Oak facility specified that representations and warranties insurance would be the sole and exclusive remedy for breach of representations and warranties except in the case of fraud. By way of further example, the divestiture agreement relating to the sale of the Stuart facility contains an $18,750 general cap on breaches of representations (other than certain specified representations) and a $25,000 cap on breaches of certain specified representations related to contracts and product warranties, in each case absent certain circumstances, including fraud or breaches of fundamental or tax representations. As disclosed in Note 3, on June 16, 2023, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the buyer of the Stuart facility resolving a working capital dispute with the buyer resulting in an amount of $2,400 payable to the Company and resolving claims by the buyer related to the accounts payable representation and warranty under the purchase agreement resulting in an amount of $9,200 payable to the buyer, with such amount applicable to the general cap referred to above. The amounts were settled on a net basis by the Company paying $6,800 to the buyer. The purchaser of the Stuart facility also commenced litigation against the Company on December 12, 2023, seeking additional indemnification for damages claimed to be approximately $130,000 for losses allegedly arising from the knowing breach of certain representations and warranties regarding the financial condition of TAS and the products manufactured by TAS and alleged failures to disclose known and widespread paint issues and certain supplier and production issues at the facility prior to the closing. While the Company cannot predict the outcome of any pending or future litigation, proceeding, or claim and no assurances can be given, the Company intends to vigorously defend claims brought against it and does not believe that any pending matter will have a material effect, individually or in the aggregate, on its financial position or results of operations. If the Company is unable to successfully and equitably resolve such claims and assertions, its business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. Additionally, in connection with certain divestitures, the Company has obtained customer consent to assign specified long-term contracts to the acquirer of the divested business by entering into consent-to-assignment agreements among the customer, the acquirer, and the Company. Pursuant to certain of these agreements, the Company remains a co-obligor under the contract pursuant to guarantee agreements with the customer that predate the divestiture transaction. The term of these obligations typically covers a period of 2 to 5 years from the date of divestiture. There is no limitation to the maximum potential future liabilities under these contracts; however, the Company is typically indemnified by acquirers against such losses that may arise from the acquirers’ failure to perform under the assigned contracts. As of March 31, 2024, no related indemnification assets or liabilities or guarantee liabilities have been recorded, and the Company has not been called upon to act as co-obligor under such arrangements through that date. Also, in connection with certain divestitures, the Company has assigned lease facility agreements to the acquirers and entered into agreements to act as a co-obligor under the lease agreement in the event of non-performance under the lease by the assignee. The Company is generally indemnified by the assignee or other third party to the transaction. On May 2, 2023, the Company received a letter from a lessor associated with one such transaction to assert the lessor’s rights against the Company as guarantor. The lease payment associated with the lease is approximately $130 per month over a lease term ending December 31, 2031, although the landlord has acknowledged its duty to mitigate damages by re-leasing the property. The Company expects to be fully indemnified for any amounts payable under such guarantee. As the Company has completed the disposal of certain facilities, it may be exposed to additional costs such as environmental remediation obligations, lease termination costs, or customer or supplier claims which may have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations when such matters arise and a reasonable estimate of the costs can be made. For example, in the year ended March 31, 2023, the Company withdrew from the IAM National Pension Fund (the “Fund), which is a multiemployer pension plan to which the Company previously contributed on behalf of certain of its represented employees. Such withdrawal occurred as part of the Company’s exit of its Spokane, Washington, composites manufacturing operations. In April 2023, the Company received a letter from the Fund confirming the Company’s complete withdrawal from the Fund and indicating that the Company’s portion of the unfunded vested benefits (the “Withdrawal Liability”) was estimated to be approximately $14,644, payable in quarterly installments of approximately $400 over a period of approximately thirteen years. The Withdrawal Liability is subject to further adjustment based on the finalization of the Fund’s actuarial valuation for the plan year ending December 31, 2021, (i.e., the applicable plan year preceding the date of the Company’s withdrawal). As of March 31, 2024, the Company's liability for this obligation on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet is approximately $13,912, representing its estimate of the remaining obligation before interest based on the letter received from the Fund. The Company is in the process of reviewing and responding to the withdrawal liability assessment, and it is possible the Withdrawal Liability could be reduced during that process.

Commitments and Contingencies

12 Months Ended

Mar. 31, 2024

Commitments And Contingencies [Abstract]

17. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Environmental Matters

Certain of the Company's current or former operations and facilities are subject to a number of federal, state, local and foreign environmental laws and regulations. In August 2023, a panel of three arbitrators made an interim decision in an ongoing arbitration between Triumph Aerostructures, LLC (“TAS”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, and Northrop Grumman Systems Corporation (“Northrop”) related to ongoing future responsibility for environmental remediation costs at four formerly occupied properties that had been previously operated by Northrop. Although the interim decision indicated that TAS would have certain ongoing responsibility for remediation at the properties, neither the agreement nor the interim decision provides a mechanism for the transfer of remediation responsibilities to TAS. While the parties continue to dispute liability for remediation, from a regulatory perspective, TAS is not a party to any regulatory order for three of the four properties, although TAS, along with Northrop, is party to the regulatory order for the fourth property. Approximately $1,300 has been accrued as a legal judgment loss and is management's best estimate of the remediation costs at the fourth property. While final resolution of this matter remains uncertain, the ultimate impact on operations could be in the range of a loss of up to $39,000, with such loss resulting in annual cash expenditures not likely to exceed $2,000 to $3,000 in a given year.

In March 2024, the panel of arbitrators made a second interim decision in the arbitration between TAS and Northrop indicating that although TAS had responsibility for certain remediation costs at the four formerly occupied properties that had been already incurred by Northrop, the panel was unable to affix an amount of damages to Northrop for those costs and asked the parties to meet and confer regarding those damages. Northrop had indicated during the second phase of the arbitration that it believed its damages incurred through December 31, 2023 to be approximately $12,000, however, Northrop did not substantiate its damages. TAS maintains that Northrop has not proven its damages after opportunity to do so in the second phase of the arbitration. The Company has accrued a liability of approximately $6,000 as a result of the second interim decision which is included within legal contingencies loss on the accompanying consolidated statement of operations for the year ended March 31, 2024.

It is anticipated that further action by the panel will occur in fiscal 2025. TAS intends to vigorously defend itself in this matter, including potentially seeking to set aside any adverse decision from the arbitration panel.

Commercial Disputes and Litigation

Throughout the course of the Company’s programs, disputes with suppliers or customers could and have arisen regarding unique contractual requirements, quality, costs or impacts to production schedules. If the Company is unable to successfully and

equitably resolve such claims and assertions, its business, financial condition, results of operations, customer relationships and related transactions could be materially adversely affected.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company is involved in other disputes, claims and lawsuits with employees, suppliers and customers, as well as governmental and regulatory inquiries, that it deems to be immaterial. Some may involve claims or potential claims of substantial damages, fines, penalties or injunctive relief. While the Company cannot predict the outcome of any pending or future litigation or proceeding and no assurances can be given, the Company does not believe that any pending matter will have a material effect, individually or in the aggregate, on its financial position or results of operations.

Divestitures, Disposals, Guarantees, and Indemnifications

As disclosed in Note 3, we have engaged in a number of divestitures. In connection with divestitures and related transactions, the Company from time to time has indemnified and has been indemnified by third parties against certain liabilities that may arise in connection with, among other things, business activities prior to the completion of the respective transactions. The term of these indemnifications, which typically pertain to environmental, tax and product liabilities, is generally indefinite. As of March 31, 2024, no indemnification assets or liabilities have been recorded.

As it relates to certain divestitures, disputes have arisen or may continue to arise between the Company and the acquirer subsequent to the completion and closing of the divestiture transaction. Such disputes have included or may include amounts payable to or from the buyer for closing working capital adjustments to the purchase price as well as claims regarding alleged violations of contractual terms, representations, and warranties of the sale agreements, among other matters. The outcome of such disputes typically involve negotiations between the Company and the acquirer, but could also lead to litigation between the parties, including as disclosed further below, and the ultimate claims made by the parties against each other could be material. As of March 31, 2024, we have accrued for our estimate of probable losses associated with such disputes, but losses in excess of those currently accrued could be incurred and may be material.

The Company has received notification of claims which allege certain bases for indemnification and damages relating to certain divestitures. The relevant agreements generally contain limits on certain damages that may be payable under the relevant agreements. For example, the divestiture agreement relating to the sale of the Red Oak facility specified that representations and warranties insurance would be the sole and exclusive remedy for breach of representations and warranties except in the case of fraud. By way of further example, the divestiture agreement relating to the sale of the Stuart facility contains an $18,750 general cap on breaches of representations (other than certain specified representations) and a $25,000 cap on breaches of certain specified representations related to contracts and product warranties, in each case absent certain circumstances, including fraud or breaches of fundamental or tax representations. As disclosed in Note 3, on June 16, 2023, the Company entered into a settlement agreement with the buyer of the Stuart facility resolving a working capital dispute with the buyer resulting in an amount of $2,400 payable to the Company and resolving claims by the buyer related to the accounts payable representation and warranty under the purchase agreement resulting in an amount of $9,200 payable to the buyer, with such amount applicable to the general cap referred to above. The amounts were settled on a net basis by the Company paying $6,800 to the buyer. The purchaser of the Stuart facility also commenced litigation against the Company on December 12, 2023, seeking additional indemnification for damages claimed to be approximately $130,000 for losses allegedly arising from the knowing breach of certain representations and warranties regarding the financial condition of TAS and the products manufactured by TAS and alleged failures to disclose known and widespread paint issues and certain supplier and production issues at the facility prior to the closing. While the Company cannot predict the outcome of any pending or future litigation, proceeding, or claim and no assurances can be given, the Company intends to vigorously defend claims brought against it and does not believe that any pending matter will have a material effect, individually or in the aggregate, on its financial position or results of operations. If the Company is unable to successfully and equitably resolve such claims and assertions, its business, financial condition, and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.

Additionally, in connection with certain divestitures, the Company has obtained customer consent to assign specified long-term contracts to the acquirer of the divested business by entering into consent-to-assignment agreements among the customer, the acquirer, and the Company. Pursuant to certain of these agreements, the Company remains a co-obligor under the contract pursuant to guarantee agreements with the customer that predate the divestiture transaction. The term of these obligations typically covers a period of 2 to 5 years from the date of divestiture. There is no limitation to the maximum potential future liabilities under these contracts; however, the Company is typically indemnified by acquirers against such losses that may arise from the acquirers’ failure to perform under the assigned contracts. As of March 31, 2024, no related indemnification assets or liabilities or guarantee liabilities have been recorded, and the Company has not been called upon to act as co-obligor under such arrangements through that date. Also, in connection with certain divestitures, the Company has assigned lease facility agreements to the acquirers and entered into agreements to act as a co-obligor under the lease agreement in the event of non-performance under the lease by the assignee. The Company is generally indemnified by the assignee or other third party to the

transaction. On May 2, 2023, the Company received a letter from a lessor associated with one such transaction to assert the lessor’s rights against the Company as guarantor. The lease payment associated with the lease is approximately $130 per month over a lease term ending December 31, 2031, although the landlord has acknowledged its duty to mitigate damages by re-leasing the property. The Company expects to be fully indemnified for any amounts payable under such guarantee.

As the Company has completed the disposal of certain facilities, it may be exposed to additional costs such as environmental remediation obligations, lease termination costs, or customer or supplier claims which may have a material effect on its financial position or results of operations when such matters arise and a reasonable estimate of the costs can be made. For example, in the year ended March 31, 2023, the Company withdrew from the IAM National Pension Fund (the “Fund), which is a multiemployer pension plan to which the Company previously contributed on behalf of certain of its represented employees. Such withdrawal occurred as part of the Company’s exit of its Spokane, Washington, composites manufacturing operations. In April 2023, the Company received a letter from the Fund confirming the Company’s complete withdrawal from the Fund and indicating that the Company’s portion of the unfunded vested benefits (the “Withdrawal Liability”) was estimated to be approximately $14,644, payable in quarterly installments of approximately $400 over a period of approximately thirteen years. The Withdrawal Liability is subject to further adjustment based on the finalization of the Fund’s actuarial valuation for the plan year ending December 31, 2021, (i.e., the applicable plan year preceding the date of the Company’s withdrawal). As of March 31, 2024, the Company's liability for this obligation on the accompanying consolidated balance sheet is approximately $13,912, representing its estimate of the remaining obligation before interest based on the letter received from the Fund. The Company is in the process of reviewing and responding to the withdrawal liability assessment, and it is possible the Withdrawal Liability could be reduced during that process.