10-K 1 a2201909z10-k.htm 10-K

Use these links to rapidly review the document
TABLE OF CONTENTS
HUNTSMAN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES INDEX TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

Form 10-K

(Mark One)    

ý

 

ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2010

OR

o

 

TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934



Commission
File Number
  Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter,
Principal Office Address and Telephone Number
  State of
Incorporation/Organization
  I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.
001-32427     Huntsman Corporation
500 Huntsman Way
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
(801) 584-5700
  Delaware   42-1648585
333-85141     Huntsman International LLC
500 Huntsman Way
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
(801) 584-5700
  Delaware   87-0630358



Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

Registrant   Title of each class   Name of each exchange on which registered
Huntsman Corporation   Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share   New York Stock Exchange
Huntsman International LLC   None   None

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:

Registrant   Title of each class
Huntsman Corporation   None
Huntsman International LLC   None



           Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.

Huntsman Corporation   YES ý   NO o
Huntsman International LLC   YES o   NO ý

           Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.

Huntsman Corporation   YES o   NO ý
Huntsman International LLC   YES o   NO ý

           Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act 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.

Huntsman Corporation   YES ý   NO o
Huntsman International LLC   YES ý   NO o

           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).

Huntsman Corporation   YES ý   NO o
Huntsman International LLC   YES o   NO o

           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 registrants' 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. o

           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 the definitions of "large accelerated filer," "accelerated filer," and "smaller reporting company" in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Huntsman Corporation   Large accelerated filer ý   Accelerated filer o   Non-accelerated filer o   Smaller reporting company o
Huntsman International LLC   Large accelerated filer o   Accelerated filer o   Non-accelerated filer ý   Smaller reporting company o

           Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).

Huntsman Corporation   YES o   NO ý
Huntsman International LLC   YES o   NO ý

           On June 30, 2010, the last business day of the registrants' most recently completed second fiscal quarter, the aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates was as follows:

Registrant   Common Equity   Market Value Held by Nonaffiliates
Huntsman Corporation   Common Stock   $931,158,052(1)
Huntsman International LLC   Units of Membership Interest   $0(2)

(1)
Based on the closing price of $8.67 per share of common stock as quoted on the New York Stock Exchange.

(2)
All units of membership interest are held by Huntsman Corporation, an affiliate.

           On February 7, 2011, the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant's classes of common equity were as follows:

Registrant   Common Equity   Outstanding
Huntsman Corporation   Common Stock   239,699,365
Huntsman International LLC   Units of Membership Interest   2,728

           This Annual Report on Form 10-K presents information for two registrants: Huntsman Corporation and Huntsman International LLC. Huntsman International LLC is a wholly owned subsidiary of Huntsman Corporation and is the principal operating company of Huntsman Corporation. The information reflected in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is equally applicable to both Huntsman Corporation and Huntsman International LLC, except where otherwise indicated.

           Huntsman International LLC meets the conditions set forth in General Instructions (I)(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and, to the extent applicable, is therefore filing this form with a reduced disclosure format.

Documents Incorporated by Reference

Part III: Proxy Statement for the 2011 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed within 120 days of
Huntsman Corporation's fiscal year ended December 31, 2010.


Table of Contents


HUNTSMAN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 
   
  Page

PART I

       
 

ITEM 1.

 

BUSINESS

  1
 

ITEM 1A.

 

RISK FACTORS

  35
 

ITEM 1B.

 

UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

  46
 

ITEM 2.

 

PROPERTIES

  46
 

ITEM 3.

 

LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

  49
 

ITEM 4.

 

(REMOVED AND RESERVED)

  52

 

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

  52

PART II

       
 

ITEM 5.

 

MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

  56
 

ITEM 6.

 

SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

  58
 

ITEM 7.

 

MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

  59
 

ITEM 7A.

 

QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

  93
 

ITEM 8.

 

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

  96
 

ITEM 9.

 

CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

  96
 

ITEM 9A.

 

CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

  96
 

ITEM 9B.

 

OTHER INFORMATION

  101

PART III

       
 

ITEM 10.

 

DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

  101
 

ITEM 11.

 

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

  101
 

ITEM 12.

 

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

  101
 

ITEM 13.

 

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

  101
 

ITEM 14.

 

PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

  101

PART IV

       
 

ITEM 15.

 

EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES

  102

i


Table of Contents


HUNTSMAN CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
HUNTSMAN INTERNATIONAL LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES
2010 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

        With respect to Huntsman Corporation, certain information set forth in this report contains "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Huntsman International is a limited liability company and, pursuant to Section 21E(b)2(E) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, the safe-harbor for certain forward-looking statements is not applicable to it.

        Forward-looking statements include statements concerning our plans, objectives, goals, strategies, future events, future revenues or performance, capital expenditures, financing needs, plans or intentions relating to acquisitions or dispositions and other information that is not historical information. In some cases, forward-looking statements can be identified by terminology such as "believes," "expects," "may," "will," "should," "anticipates" or "intends" or the negative of such terms or other comparable terminology, or by discussions of strategy. We may also make additional forward-looking statements from time to time. All such subsequent forward-looking statements, whether written or oral, by us or on our behalf, are also expressly qualified by these cautionary statements.

        All forward-looking statements, including without limitation management's examination of historical operating trends, are based upon our current expectations and various assumptions. Our expectations, beliefs and projections are expressed in good faith and we believe there is a reasonable basis for them, but there can be no assurance that management's expectations, beliefs and projections will result or be achieved. All forward-looking statements apply only as of the date made. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise forward-looking statements which may be made to reflect events or circumstances after the date made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events.

        There are a number of risks and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements contained in or contemplated by this report. Any forward-looking statements should be considered in light of the risks set forth in "Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors" and elsewhere in this report.

        This report includes information with respect to market share, industry conditions and forecasts that we obtained from internal industry research, publicly available information (including industry publications and surveys), and surveys and market research provided by consultants. The publicly available information and the reports, forecasts and other research provided by consultants generally state that the information contained therein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. We have not independently verified any of the data from third-party sources, nor have we ascertained the underlying economic assumptions relied upon therein. Similarly, our internal research and forecasts are based upon our management's understanding of industry conditions, and such information has not been verified by any independent sources.

        For convenience in this report, the terms "Company," "our," "us," or "we" may be used to refer to Huntsman Corporation and, unless the context otherwise requires, its subsidiaries and predecessors. Any references to our "Company," "we," "us" or "our" as of a date prior to October 19, 2004 (the date of our formation) are to Huntsman Holdings, LLC and its subsidiaries (including their respective predecessors). In this report, "Huntsman International" refers to Huntsman International LLC (our 100% owned subsidiary) and, unless the context otherwise requires, its subsidiaries; "HPS" refers to Huntsman Polyurethanes Shanghai Ltd. (a consolidated splitting joint venture with Shanghai Chlor-Alkali Chemical Company, Ltd); and "SLIC" refers to Shanghai Liengheng Isocyanate Investment BV (an unconsolidated manufacturing joint venture with BASF AG and three Chinese chemical companies).

        In this report, we may use, without definition, the common names of competitors or other industry participants. We may also use the common names or abbreviations for certain chemicals or products. Many of these terms are defined in the Glossary of Chemical Terms found at the conclusion of "Part I. Item 1. Business" below.

ii


Table of Contents


PART I

ITEM 1.    BUSINESS

GENERAL

        We are a global manufacturer of differentiated organic chemical products and of inorganic chemical products. Our Company, a Delaware corporation, was formed in 2004 to hold the businesses of Huntsman Holdings, LLC, a company founded by Jon M. Huntsman. Mr. Huntsman founded the predecessor to our Company in the early 1970s as a small polystyrene plastics packaging company. Since then, we have grown through a series of significant acquisitions and now own a global portfolio of businesses.

        We operate all of our businesses through Huntsman International, our 100% owned subsidiary. Huntsman International is a Delaware limited liability company and was formed in 1999.

        Our principal executive offices are located at 500 Huntsman Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, and our telephone number at that location is (801) 584-5700.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

Recent Note Redemption

        On January 18, 2011, Huntsman International redeemed $100 million of its 7.375% senior subordinated notes due 2015. The total redemption payment, excluding accrued interest, was $102 million, which included $2 million of call premiums. We expect to record a loss on early extinguishment of debt in the first quarter of 2011 of $3 million related to this redemption.

Announcement of Fertilizer Plant in Calais, France

        In January 2011, we announced an agreement in principle to invest approximately €30 million ($40 million) to build a new magnesium sulfate fertilizer production operation at our titanium dioxide plant in Calais, France. We have approved this investment in principle; nevertheless, it is subject to certain conditions, including obtaining permits and securing additional financing.

        The new fertilizer plant will use spent acid from our Calais pigment operations and will enable the closure of part of our Calais effluent treatment plant. Upon completion, the operation of the plant will deliver environmental benefits in the form of lower energy consumption and reduced carbon dioxide emissions. These environmental benefits would be coupled with cost reductions that are expected to increase the efficiency, sustainability and cost effectiveness of the entire Calais site.

Consolidation of Maleic Anhydride Manufacturing Joint Venture in 2011

        We own a 50% interest in Sasol-Huntsman GmbH and Co. KG ("Sasol-Huntsman"), which has been accounted for using the equity method. Sasol-Huntsman owns and operates a maleic anhyride facility in Moers, Germany. In late February 2011, we expect a plant expansion to come online. We will begin consolidating the results of Sasol-Huntsman in the first quarter of 2011. See "Note 6. Investment in Unconsolidated Affiliates" to our consolidated financial statements.

OVERVIEW

        Our products comprise a broad range of chemicals and formulations which we market globally to a diversified group of consumer and industrial customers. Our products are used in a wide range of applications, including those in the adhesives, aerospace, automotive, construction products, durable and non-durable consumer products, electronics, medical, packaging, paints and coatings, power generation, refining, synthetic fiber, textile chemicals and dye industries. We are a leading global

1


Table of Contents


producer in many of our key product lines, including MDI, amines, surfactants, epoxy-based polymer formulations, textile chemicals, dyes, maleic anhydride and titanium dioxide. Our administrative, research and development and manufacturing operations are primarily conducted at the facilities listed in "—Item 2. Properties" below, which are located in 30 countries. As of December 31, 2010, we employed approximately 12,000 associates worldwide. Our revenues for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 were $9,250 million, $7,665 million and $10,056 million, respectively.

        We operate in five segments: Polyurethanes, Performance Products, Advanced Materials, Textile Effects and Pigments. In a series of transactions beginning in 2006, we sold or shutdown substantially all of our Australian styrenics, Polymers and Base Chemicals operations. We report the results of our former Australian styrenics, Polymers and Base Chemicals businesses as discontinued operations in our statements of operations. See "Note 27. Discontinued Operations" to our consolidated financial statements.

Our Products

        We produce differentiated organic chemical and inorganic chemical products. Our Polyurethanes, Performance Products, Advanced Materials and Textile Effects segments produce differentiated organic chemical products and our Pigments segment produces inorganic chemical products.

        Growth in our differentiated products has been driven by the substitution of our products for other materials and by the level of global economic activity. Accordingly, the profitability of our differentiated products has been somewhat less influenced by the cyclicality that typically impacts the petrochemical industry. Our Pigments business, while cyclical, is influenced by seasonal demand patterns in the coatings industry.

2010 Segment Revenues(1)
   
 
2010 Segment EBITDA from Continuing Operations(1)

 

 

 

 

 
GRAPHIC

(1)
Percentage allocations in this chart do not give effect to Corporate and other unallocated items, eliminations and EBITDA from discontinued operations. For a detailed disclosure of our revenues, total assets and EBITDA by segment, see "Note 29. Operating Segment Information" to our consolidated financial statements. For a discussion of EBITDA by segment and a reconciliation of EBITDA to net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation and cash provided by operating activities, see "Part II. Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Results of Operations."

2


Table of Contents

        The following table identifies the key products, their principal end markets and applications and representative customers of each of our segments:

Segment
  Products   End Markets and Applications   Representative Customers
Polyurethanes   MDI, PO, polyols, PG, TPU, aniline and MTBE   Refrigeration and appliance insulation, construction products, adhesives, automotive, footwear, furniture, cushioning, specialized engineering applications and fuel additives   BMW, Certainteed, Electrolux, Firestone, GE, Haier, Louisiana Pacific, Recticel, Weyerhauser

Performance Products

 

Amines, surfactants, LAB, maleic anhydride, other performance chemicals, EG, olefins and technology licenses

 

Detergents, personal care products, agrochemicals, lubricant and fuel additives, adhesives, paints and coatings, construction, marine and automotive products and PET fibers and resins

 

Chevron, Henkel, The Sun Products Corporation, Monsanto, Procter & Gamble, Unilever, Lubrizol, Reichhold, Dow, L'Oreal, Afton

Advanced Materials

 

Basic liquid and solid epoxy resins; specialty resin compounds; cross-linking, matting and curing agents; epoxy, acrylic and polyurethane-based formulations

 

Adhesives, composites for aerospace, automotive, and wind power generation; construction and civil engineering; industrial coatings; electrical power transmission; consumer electronics

 

ABB, Akzo, BASF, Boeing, Bosch, Cytec, Dow, Hexcel, ISOLA, Omya, PPG, ASTORIT, Sanarrow, Schneider, Sherwin Williams, Siemens, Sika, Speed Fair, Syngenta, Toray

Textile Effects

 

Textile chemicals and dyes

 

Apparel, home and technical textiles

 

Esquel Group, Alok Industries, Nice Dyeing, Fruit of the Loom, Hanesbrands, Zaber & Zubair, Aunde, Y.R.C., Guilford Mills, Tencate

Pigments

 

Titanium dioxide

 

Paints and coatings, plastics, paper, printing inks, fibers and ceramics

 

Akzo, PPG, Clariant, Jotun, PolyOne

Polyurethanes

General

        We are a leading global manufacturer and marketer of a broad range of polyurethane chemicals, including MDI products, PO, polyols, PG and TPU. Polyurethane chemicals are used to produce rigid and flexible foams, as well as coatings, adhesives, sealants and elastomers. We focus on the higher-margin, higher-growth markets for MDI and MDI-based polyurethane systems. Growth in our Polyurethanes segment has been driven primarily by the continued substitution of MDI-based products for other materials across a broad range of applications. We operate five primary Polyurethanes manufacturing facilities in the U.S., Europe and China. We also operate 14 Polyurethanes formulation facilities, which are located in close proximity to our customers worldwide.

        Our customers produce polyurethane products through the combination of an isocyanate, such as MDI or TDI, with polyols, which are derived largely from PO and EO. While the range of TDI-based products is relatively limited, we are able to produce over 2,000 distinct MDI-based polyurethane products by modifying the MDI molecule through varying the proportion and type of polyol used and by introducing other chemical additives to our MDI formulations. As a result, polyurethane products, especially those derived from MDI, are continuing to replace traditional products in a wide range of end use markets, including insulation in construction and appliances, cushioning for automotive and furniture, adhesives, wood binders, footwear and other specialized engineering applications.

        We are a leading North American producer of PO. We and some of our customers process PO into derivative products, such as polyols for polyurethane products, PG and various other chemical products. End uses for these derivative products include applications in the home furnishings, construction, appliance, packaging, automotive and transportation, food, paints and coatings and

3


Table of Contents


cleaning products industries. We also produce MTBE as a co-product of our PO manufacturing process. MTBE is an oxygenate that is blended with gasoline to reduce harmful vehicle emissions and to enhance the octane rating of gasoline. See "—Environmental, Health and Safety Matters—MTBE Developments" below and "Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors" for a discussion of legal and regulatory developments that have resulted in the curtailment and potential elimination of MTBE in gasoline in the U.S. and elsewhere. Also, see "—Manufacturing and Operations" below and "Part II. Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" for a discussion of material changes concerning sales of MTBE.

        In 1992, we were the first global supplier of polyurethane chemicals to open a technical service center in China. We have since expanded this facility to include an integrated polyurethanes formulation facility. In January 2003, we entered into two related joint ventures to build MDI production and finishing facilities near Shanghai, China. Production at our MDI finishing plant near Shanghai, China operated by HPS, a consolidated joint venture, was commissioned on June 30, 2006. Production at the MNB, aniline and crude MDI plants operated by SLIC, an unconsolidated joint venture, commenced on September 30, 2006. These world-scale facilities strengthen our ability to service our customers in the critical Chinese market and will support the significant demand growth that we believe this region will continue to experience.

Products and Markets

        MDI is used primarily in rigid foam applications and in a wide variety of customized, higher-value flexible foam and coatings, adhesives, sealants and elastomers. Polyols, including polyether and polyester polyols, are used in conjunction with MDI and TDI in rigid foam, flexible foam and other non-foam applications. PO is one of the principal raw materials for producing polyether polyols. The following chart illustrates the range of product types and end uses for polyurethane chemicals.

GRAPHIC

        Polyurethane chemicals are sold to customers who combine the chemicals to produce polyurethane products. Depending on their needs, customers will use either commodity polyurethane chemicals produced for mass sales or polyurethane systems tailored for their specific requirements. By varying the blend, additives and specifications of the polyurethane chemicals, manufacturers are able to develop and produce a breadth and variety of polyurethane products.

4


Table of Contents

        MDI.    MDI has a substantially larger market size and a higher growth rate than TDI. This is primarily because MDI can be used to make polyurethanes with a broader range of properties and can therefore be used in a wider range of applications than TDI. We believe that future growth of MDI is expected to be driven by the continued substitution of MDI-based polyurethane for fiberglass and other materials currently used in rigid insulation foam for construction. We expect that other markets, such as binders for reconstituted wood board products, specialty cushioning applications and coatings will further contribute to the continued growth of MDI.

        With the recent rapid growth of the developing Asian economies, the Asian markets have now become the largest market for MDI.

        In addition to the Company, there are three other major global producers of MDI: Bayer, BASF and Dow. While there are also some regional producers in Asia and Europe, we believe it is unlikely that any new global producers of MDI will emerge in the foreseeable future due to the substantial requirements for entry, such as the limited availability of licenses for MDI technology and the significant capital commitment and integration that is required to develop both the necessary technology and the infrastructure to manufacture and market MDI.

        TPU.    TPU is a high-quality, fully formulated thermal plastic derived from the reaction of MDI or an aliphatic isocyanate with polyols to produce unique qualities such as durability, flexibility, strength, abrasion-resistance, shock absorbency and chemical resistance. We can tailor the performance characteristics of TPU to meet the specific requirements of our customers. TPU is used in injection molding and small components for the automotive and footwear industries. It is also extruded into films, wires and cables for use in a wide variety of applications in the coatings, adhesives, sealants and elastomers markets.

        Polyols.    Polyols are combined with MDI, TDI and other isocyanates to create a broad spectrum of polyurethane products. Demand for specialty polyols has been growing at approximately the same rate at which MDI consumption has grown.

        Aniline.    Aniline is an intermediate chemical used primarily to manufacture MDI. Generally, aniline is either consumed internally by the producers of the aniline or is sold to third parties under long-term supply contracts. We believe that the lack of a significant spot market for aniline means that in order to remain competitive, MDI manufacturers must either be integrated with an aniline manufacturing facility or have a long-term, cost-competitive aniline supply contract.

5


Table of Contents

        PO.    PO is an intermediate chemical used mainly to produce a wide range of polyols and PG. Demand for PO depends largely on overall economic demand, especially that of consumer durables. The following chart illustrates the primary end markets and applications for PO.

GRAPHIC

        MTBE.    MTBE is an oxygenate that is blended with gasoline to reduce harmful vehicle emissions and to enhance the octane rating of gasoline. The use of MTBE can be controversial, and it has been effectively eliminated in the U.S. market. See "—Environmental, Health and Safety Matters—MTBE Developments" below and "Part I. Item 1A. Risk Factors." We continue to sell MTBE for use as a gasoline additive, substantially all of which is sold for use outside the U.S. See "—Manufacturing and Operations" below and "Part II. Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations."

Sales and Marketing

        We manage a global work force which sells our polyurethane chemicals to over 3,500 customers in more than 90 countries. Our sales and technical resources are organized to support major regional markets, as well as key end use markets which require a more global approach. These key end use markets include the appliance, automotive, footwear, furniture and coatings, construction products, adhesives, sealants and elastomers industries.

        We provide a wide variety of polyurethane solutions as components (i.e., the isocyanate or the polyol) or in the form of "systems" in which we provide the total isocyanate and polyol formulation to our customers in ready-to-use form. Our ability to deliver a range of polyurethane solutions and technical support tailored to meet our customer's needs is critical to our long term success. We have strategically located our polyurethane formulation facilities, commonly referred to in the chemicals industry as "systems houses," close to our customers, enabling us to focus on customer support and technical service. We believe this customer support and technical service system contributes to customer retention and also provides opportunities for identifying further product and service needs of customers. We manufacture polyols primarily to support our MDI customers' requirements.

        We believe that the extensive market knowledge and industry experience of our sales teams and technical experts, in combination with our strong emphasis on customer relationships, have facilitated

6


Table of Contents


our ability to establish and maintain long-term customer supply positions. Due to the specialized nature of our markets, our sales force must possess technical knowledge of our products and their applications. Our strategy is to continue to increase sales to existing customers and to attract new customers by providing innovative solutions, quality products, reliable supply, competitive prices and superior customer service.

Manufacturing and Operations

        Our MDI production facilities are located in Geismar, Louisiana; Rozenburg, Netherlands; and through our joint ventures in Caojing, China. These facilities receive aniline, which is a primary material used in the production of MDI, from our facilities located in Geismar, Louisiana; Wilton, U.K.; and Caojing, China. We believe that this relative scale and product integration of our large facilities provide a significant competitive advantage over other producers. In addition to reducing transportation costs for our raw materials, integration helps reduce our exposure to cyclical prices.

        The following table sets forth the annual production capacity of polyurethane chemicals at each of our polyurethanes facilities:

 
  MDI   Polyols   TPU   Aniline   Nitrobenzene   PO   PG   MTBE  
 
  (millions of pounds)
  (millions
of gallons)

 

Geismar, Louisiana

    970     160           715 (2)   953 (2)                  

Osnabrück, Germany

          26     57                                

Port Neches, Texas

                                  525     145     260  

Ringwood, Illinois

                18                                

Caojing, China

    265 (1)                                          

Rozenburg, Netherlands

    880     130                                      

Wilton, U.K. 

                      715     953                    
                                   

Total

    2,115     316     75     1,430     1,906     525     145     260  
                                   

(1)
Represents our 50% share of capacity from SLIC, an unconsolidated Chinese joint venture.

(2)
Represents our approximately 78% share of capacity under our consolidated Rubicon LLC manufacturing joint venture with Chemtura Corporation.

        At both our Geismar and Rozenburg facilities we utilize sophisticated proprietary technology to produce our MDI. This technology, which is also used in our Chinese joint venture, contributes to our position as a low cost MDI producer. In addition to MDI, we use a proprietary manufacturing process to manufacture PO. We own or license all technology and know-how developed and utilized at our PO facility. Our process combines isobutane and oxygen in proprietary oxidation (peroxidation) reactors, thereby forming TBHP and TBA, which are further processed into PO and MTBE, respectively. Because our PO production process is less expensive relative to other technologies and allows all of our PO co-products to be processed into saleable or useable materials, we believe that our PO production technology possesses several distinct advantages over its alternatives.

        We operate polyurethane systems houses in Buenos Aires, Argentina; Deerpark, Australia; Shanghai, China; Cartagena, Colombia; Deggendorf, Germany; Thane (Maharashtra), India; Ternate, Italy; Tlalnepantla, Mexico; Mississauga, Ontario; Kuan Yin, Taiwan; Samuprakam, Thailand; Osnabrück, Germany; Dammam, Saudi Arabia and Obninsk, Russia.

7


Table of Contents

Joint Ventures

        Rubicon Joint Venture.    Chemtura Corporation is our joint venture partner in Rubicon LLC, which owns aniline, nitrobenzene and DPA manufacturing facilities in Geismar, Louisiana. We are entitled to approximately 78% of the nitrobenzene and aniline production capacity of Rubicon LLC, and Chemtura Corporation is entitled to 100% of the DPA production. In addition to operating the joint venture's aniline, nitrobenzene and DPA facilities, Rubicon LLC also operates our wholly owned MDI and polyol facilities at Geismar and is responsible for providing other auxiliary services to the entire Geismar complex. As a result of this joint venture, we are able to achieve greater scale and lower costs for our products than we would otherwise have been able to obtain. Rubicon LLC is consolidated in our financial statements.

        Chinese MDI Joint Ventures.    In January 2003, we entered into two related joint venture agreements to build MDI production facilities near Shanghai, China. SLIC, our manufacturing joint venture with BASF AG and three Chinese chemical companies, built three plants that manufacture MNB, aniline and crude MDI. We effectively own 35% of SLIC and account for our investment under the equity method. HPS, our splitting joint venture with Shanghai Chlor-Alkali Chemical Company, Ltd, has constructed a plant to manufacture pure MDI, polymeric MDI and MDI variants. We own 70% of HPS and it is a consolidated affiliate. These projects have been funded by a combination of equity invested by the joint venture partners and borrowed funds. SLIC and HPS commenced operations during 2006. The total production capacity of the SLIC facilities is 530 million pounds per year of MDI and the production capacity of the HPS facility is 300 million pounds per year of MDI finished products.

        Russian MDI, Coatings and Systems Joint Venture.    In 2006, we purchased a 45% interest in International Polyurethane Investments B.V. This company's wholly-owned subsidiary, NMG is a leading polyurethanes producer headquartered in Obninsk, Russia. We account for this investment under the equity method. This joint venture, now Huntsman NMG ZAO, manufactures and markets a range of polyurethane systems in adhesives, coatings, elastomers and insulation using our MDI products.

Raw Materials

        The primary raw materials for MDI-based polyurethane chemicals are benzene and PO. Benzene is a widely available commodity that is the primary feedstock for the production of MDI and aniline. Historically, benzene has been the largest component of our raw material costs. We purchase benzene from third parties to manufacture nitrobenzene and aniline, almost all of which we then use to produce MDI.

        A major cost in the production of polyols is attributable to the costs of PO. The integration of our PO business with our polyurethane chemicals business gives us access to a competitively priced, strategic source of PO and the opportunity to develop polyols that enhance our range of MDI products. The primary raw materials used in our PO production process are butane/isobutane, propylene, methanol and oxygen, which accounted for 53%, 35%, 11% and 1%, respectively, of total raw material costs in 2010. We purchase our raw materials primarily under long-term contracts. While most of these feedstocks are commodity materials generally available to us from a wide variety of suppliers at competitive prices in the spot market, all the propylene used in the production of our PO is produced internally and delivered through a pipeline connected to our PO facility.

Competition

        Our major competitors in the polyurethane chemicals market include BASF, Bayer, Dow, Yantai Wanhua and LyondellBasell. While these competitors and others produce various types and quantities of polyurethane chemicals, we focus on MDI and MDI-based polyurethane systems. Our polyurethane

8


Table of Contents


chemicals business competes in two basic ways: (1) where price is the dominant element of competition, our polyurethane chemicals business differentiates itself by its high level of customer support, including cooperation on technical and safety matters; and (2) elsewhere, we compete on the basis of product performance and our ability to react quickly to changing customer needs and by providing customers with innovative solutions to their needs.

        Some of our competitors in the Polyurethanes segment are among the world's largest chemical companies and major integrated petroleum companies. These competitors may have their own raw material resources. Some of these companies may be able to produce products more economically than we can. In addition, some of our competitors in this market have greater financial resources, which may enable them to invest significant capital into their businesses, including expenditures for research and development. If any of our current or future competitors in this market develop proprietary technology that enables them to produce products at a significantly lower cost, our technology could be rendered uneconomical or obsolete.

Performance Products

General

        Our Performance Products segment is organized around three market areas: performance specialties, performance intermediates and maleic anhydride and licensing, and serves a wide variety of consumer and industrial end markets. In performance specialties, we are a leading global producer of amines, carbonates and certain specialty surfactants. Growth in demand in our performance specialties market tends to be driven by the end-performance characteristics that our products deliver to our customers. These products are manufactured for use in a growing number of niche industrial end uses and have been characterized by growing demand, technology substitution and stable profitability. For example, we are one of two significant global producers of polyetheramines, for which our sales volumes have grown at a compound annual rate of over 9% in the last 10 years due to strong demand in a number of industrial applications, such as epoxy curing agents, oil drilling, agrochemicals, fuel additives and civil construction materials. In performance intermediates, we consume internally produced and third-party-sourced base petrochemicals in the manufacture of our surfactants, LAB and ethanolamines products, which are primarily used in detergency, consumer products and industrial applications. We also produce EG, which is primarily used in the production of polyester fibers and PET packaging. We believe we are North America's largest and lowest-cost producer of maleic anhydride. Maleic anhydride is the building block for UPRs, which are mainly used in the production of fiberglass reinforced resins for marine, automotive and construction products. We are the leading global licensor of maleic anhydride manufacturing technology and are also the largest supplier of butane fixed bed catalyst used in the manufacture of maleic anhydride. Our licensing group also licenses technology on behalf of our other Huntsman businesses. We operate 16 Performance Products manufacturing facilities in North America, Europe, Middle East, Asia and Australia.

        We have the annual capacity to produce approximately 1.4 billion pounds of more than 250 amines and other performance chemicals. We believe we are the largest global producer of polyetheramines, propylene carbonates, ethylene carbonates, DGA® agent and morpholine, the second-largest global producer of ethyleneamines and the third-largest North American producer of ethanolamines. We also produce substituted propylamines. We use internally produced ethylene, EO, EG and PO in the manufacture of many of our amines. Our products are manufactured at our Port Neches, Conroe and Freeport, Texas facilities and at our facilities in Llanelli, U.K. Petfurdo, Hungary and Jurong Island, Singapore. Since mid-2010 we have been manufacturing ethyleneamines through our 50/50 joint venture with Zamil Group (the "Arabian Amines Company") located in Jubail, Saudi Arabia. The joint venture has the capacity to produce 60 million pounds of ethyleneamines per annum. Our amines are used in a wide variety of consumer and industrial applications, including personal care products, polyurethane

9


Table of Contents


foam, fuel and lubricant additives, paints and coatings, composites, solvents and catalysts. Our key amines customers include Akzo, Chevron, BASF, Hercules, Afton, Unilever, Monsanto and PPG.

        We have the capacity to produce approximately 2.5 billion pounds of surfactant products annually at our eight facilities located in North America, Europe and Australia. We are a leading global manufacturer of nonionic, anionic, cationic and amphoteric surfactants products and are characterized by our breadth of product offering and market coverage. Our surfactant products are primarily used in consumer detergent and industrial cleaning applications. In addition, we manufacture and market a diversified range of mild surfactants and specialty formulations for use in personal care applications. We are also a leading European producer of components for powder and liquid laundry detergents and other cleaners. We continue to strengthen and diversify our surfactant product offering into formulated specialty surfactant products, for use in various industrial applications such as leather and textile treatment, foundry and construction, agrochemicals, fuels and lubricants, polymers and coatings. We are growing our global agrochemical surfactant technology and product offerings. Our key surfactants customers include Sun Products, L'Oreal, Monsanto, Nufarm, Clorox, Henkel, Colgate, Procter & Gamble and Unilever.

        We are North America's second-largest producer of LAB, with alkylation capacity of 375 million pounds per year at our plant in Chocolate Bayou, Texas. LAB is a surfactant intermediate which is converted into LAS, a major anionic surfactant used worldwide for the production of consumer, industrial and institutional laundry detergents. We also manufacture a higher-molecular-weight alkylate which is used as an additive to lubricants. Our key customers for LAB and specialty alkylates include Colgate, Lubrizol, Henkel, Procter & Gamble, Unilever and Sun Products.

        We believe we are North America's largest producer of maleic anhydride, a highly versatile chemical intermediate that is used to produce UPRs, which are mainly used in the production of fiberglass reinforced resins for marine, automotive and construction products. Maleic anhydride is also used in the production of lubricants, food additives and artificial sweeteners. We have the capacity to produce approximately 340 million pounds annually at our facilities located in Pensacola, Florida and Geismar, Louisiana. We also own a 50% interest in Sasol-Huntsman, which has been accounted for using the equity method. This joint venture owns and operates a facility in Moers, Germany with an annual capacity of 137 million pounds. In late February 2011, a plant expansion will come online raising the capacity of the joint venture to 232 million pounds. We will begin consolidating the results of Sasol-Huntsman in the first quarter of 2011. We also license our maleic anhydride technology and supply our catalysts to licensees and to worldwide merchant customers. As a result of our long-standing research and development efforts aided by our pilot and catalyst preparation plants, we have successfully introduced six generations of our maleic anhydride catalysts. Patent applications have been filed for our seventh generation catalyst which should be commercially available in 2011. Revenue from licensing and catalyst comes from new plant commissioning, as well as current plant retrofits and catalyst change schedules. Our key maleic anhydride customers include AOC, Chevron, Oronite, Cook Composites, Dixie, Lubrizol, Infineum, Reichhold and Bartek.

        We also have the capacity to produce approximately 945 million pounds of EG annually at our facilities in Botany, Australia and Port Neches, Texas.

10


Table of Contents

Products and Markets

        Performance Specialties.    The following table shows the end-market applications for our performance specialties products:

Product Group
  Applications

Specialty Amines

  liquid soaps, personal care, lubricant and fuel additives, polyurethane foams, fabric softeners, paints and coatings, refinery processing, water treating

Polyetheramines

 

polyurethane foams and insulation, construction and flooring, paints and coatings, lubricant and fuel additives, adhesives, epoxy composites, agrochemicals, oilfield chemicals, printing inks, pigment dispersion

Ethyleneamines

 

lubricant and fuel additives, epoxy hardeners, wet strength resins, chelating agents, fungicides

Morpholine/DGA® agent and Gas Treating

 

hydrocarbon processing, construction chemicals, synthetic rubber, water treating, electronics applications, gas treatment and agriculture

Carbonates

 

lubricant and fuel additives, agriculture, electronics applications, textile treatment, solar panels

Specialty Surfactants

 

agricultural herbicides, construction, paper de-inking, lubricants

        Our performance specialties products are organized around the following end markets: coatings, polymers and resins; process additives; resources, fuels and lubricants; and agrochemicals.

        Amines.    Amines broadly refers to the family of intermediate chemicals that are produced by reacting ammonia with various ethylene and propylene derivatives. Generally, amines are valued for their properties as a reactive, emulsifying, dispersant, detergent, solvent or corrosion inhibiting agent. Growth in demand for amines is highly correlated with GDP growth due to its strong links to general industrial and consumer products markets. However, certain segments of the amines market, such as polyetheramines, have grown at rates well in excess of GDP growth due to new product development, technical innovation, and substitution and replacement of competing products. For example, polyetheramines are used by customers who demand increasingly sophisticated performance characteristics as an additive in the manufacture of highly customized epoxy formulations, enabling customers to penetrate new markets and substitute for traditional curing materials. As amines are generally sold based upon the performance characteristics that they provide to customer- specific end use application, pricing does not generally fluctuate directly with movements in underlying raw materials.

        Morpholine/DGA® Agent.    Morpholine and DGA® agent are produced as co-products by reacting ammonia with DEG. Morpholine is used in a number of niche industrial applications including rubber curing (as an accelerator) and flocculants for water treatment. DGA® agent is primarily used in gas treating, electronics, herbicides and metalworking end use applications.

        Carbonates.    Ethylene and propylene carbonates are manufactured by reacting EO and PO with carbon dioxide. Carbonates are used as solvents and as reactive diluents in polymer and coating applications. They are also increasingly being used as a photo-resist solvent in the manufacture of printed circuit boards, solar panels, LCD screens and the production of lithium batteries. Also, propylene carbonates have recently received approval by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (the "EPA") for use as a solvent in certain agricultural applications. We expect these solvents to replace traditional aromatic solvents that are increasingly subject to legislative restrictions and prohibitions.

11


Table of Contents

        Performance Intermediates.    The following table sets forth the end markets for our performance intermediates products:

Product Group
  End Markets
Surfactants    
 
Alkoxylates

 

household detergents, industrial cleaners, anti-fog chemicals for glass, asphalt emulsions, shampoos, polymerization additives, de-emulsifiers for petroleum production
 
Sulfonates/Sulfates

 

powdered detergents, liquid detergents, shampoos, body washes, dishwashing liquids, industrial cleaners, emulsion polymerization, concrete superplasticizers, gypsum wallboard
 
Esters and Derivatives

 

shampoo, body wash, textile and leather treatment
 
Nitrogen Derivatives

 

bleach thickeners, baby shampoo, fabric conditioners, other personal care products
 
Formulated Blends

 

household detergents, textile and leather treatment, personal care products, pharmaceutical intermediates
 
EO/PO Block Co-Polymers

 

automatic dishwasher detergents

Ethanolamines

 

wood preservatives, herbicides, construction, gas treatment, metalworking

LAB

 

consumer detergents, industrial and institutional detergents, synthetic lubricants

EG

 

polyester fibers and PET bottle resins, antifreeze

        Surfactants.    Surfactants or "surface active agents" are substances that combine a water soluble component with a water insoluble component in the same molecule. While surfactants are most commonly used for their detergency in cleaning applications, they are also valued for their emulsification, foaming, dispersing, penetrating and wetting properties in a variety of industries.

        Demand growth for surfactants is relatively stable and exhibits little cyclicality. The main consumer product applications for surfactants can demand new formulations with improved performance characteristics, which affords considerable opportunity for innovative surfactants manufacturers like us to provide surfactants and blends with differentiated specifications and properties. For basic surfactants, pricing tends to have a strong relationship to underlying raw material prices and usually lags raw material price movements.

        Ethanolamines.    Ethanolamines are a range of chemicals produced by the reaction of EO with ammonia. They are used as intermediates in the production of a variety of industrial, agricultural and consumer products. There are a limited number of competitors due to the technical and cost barriers to entry. Growth in this sector has typically been higher than GDP but saw a decline in late 2009 followed by a recovery in demand in 2010. We believe the ethanolamines market in North America is currently balanced.

        LAB.    LAB is a surfactant intermediate which is produced through the reaction of benzene with either normal paraffins or linear alpha olefins. Nearly all the LAB produced globally is converted into LAS, a major anionic surfactant used worldwide for the production of consumer, industrial and institutional laundry detergents.

12


Table of Contents

        Three major manufacturers lead the traditional detergency market for LAB in North America: Procter & Gamble, Henkel and The Sun Products Corp. We believe that two-thirds of the LAB global capacity lies in the hands of ten producers, with three or four major players in each of the three regional markets. Although the North American market for LAB is mature, we expect Latin American and other developing countries to grow as detergent demand grows at a faster rate than GDP. However, growth in demand for specialty alkylates for use in lubricants is expected to be higher than GDP. We have developed a unique manufacturing capability for a high molecular weight alkylate for this market. With a significant technical barrier to entry, our specialty alkylate capability has allowed us greater diversity in our portfolio and strengthened our competitive position versus LAB-only producers.

        EG.    We consume our internally produced EO to produce three types of EG: MEG, DEG and TEG. MEG is consumed primarily in the polyester (fiber and bottle resin) and antifreeze end markets and is also used in a wide variety of industrial applications including synthetic lubricants, plasticizers, solvents and emulsifiers. DEG is consumed internally for the production of Morpholine/DGA® agent and polyols. TEG is used internally for the production of polyols and is sold into the market for dehydration of natural gas. We continue to optimize our EO and EG operations depending on the fundamental market demand for EG.

        Maleic Anhydride and Licensing.    The following table sets forth the end markets for our maleic anhydride products:

Product Group
  End Markets

Maleic anhydride

  boat hulls, automotive, construction, lubricant and fuel additives, countertops, agrochemicals, paper, and food additives

Maleic anhydride catalyst and technology licensing

  maleic anhydride, BDO and its derivatives, and PBT manufacturers

        Maleic anhydride is a chemical intermediate that is produced by oxidizing either benzene or normal butane through the use of a catalyst. The largest use of maleic anhydride in the U.S. is in the production of UPRs, which we believe account for approximately 22% of North American maleic anhydride demand. UPR is the main ingredient in fiberglass reinforced resins, which are used for marine and automotive applications and commercial and residential construction products.

        Our maleic anhydride technology is a proprietary fixed bed process with solvent recovery and is characterized by low butane consumption and an energy- efficient, high-percentage-recovery solvent recovery system. This process competes against two other processes, the fluid bed process and the fixed bed process with water recovery. We believe that our process is superior in the areas of feedstock and energy efficiency and solvent recovery. The maleic anhydride-based route to BDO manufacture is currently the preferred process technology and is favored over the other routes, which include PO, butadiene and acetylene as feedstocks. As a result, the growth in demand for BDO has resulted in increased demand for our maleic anhydride technology and catalyst.

        Total North American demand for maleic anhydride in 2010 was approximately 547 million pounds. Over time, demand for maleic anhydride has generally grown at rates that slightly exceed GDP growth. However, given its dependence on the UPR market, which is heavily influenced by construction end markets, demand for this application can be cyclical. Generally, changes in price have resulted from changes in industry capacity utilization as opposed to changes in underlying raw material costs.

        On April 1, 2008, we announced that Sasol-Huntsman, our 50/50 maleic anhydride joint venture located in Moers, Germany, would be expanding its manufacturing capacity by approximately 100 million pounds per year. The new capacity will come online in the first quarter of 2011. The joint

13


Table of Contents


venture received secured nonrecourse financing that together with its cash flows from operations was used to fund the expansion.

Sales and Marketing

        We sell over 2,000 products to over 4,000 customers globally through our Performance Products marketing groups, which have extensive market knowledge, considerable chemical industry experience and well established customer relationships.

        Our performance specialties markets are organized around end use market applications, such as coatings, polymers and resins and agrochemical. In these end uses, our marketing efforts are focused on how our product offerings perform in certain customer applications. We believe that this approach enhances the value of our product offerings and creates opportunities for ongoing differentiation in our development activities with our customers. Our performance intermediates and maleic anhydride groups organize their marketing efforts around their products and geographic regions served. We also provide extensive pre- and post-sales technical service support to our customers where our technical service professionals work closely with our research and development functions to tailor our product offerings to meet our customers unique and changing requirements. Finally, these technical service professionals interact closely with our market managers and business leadership teams to help guide future offerings and market approach strategies.

        In addition to our focused direct sales efforts, we maintain an extensive global network of distributors and agents that also sell our products. These distributors and agents typically promote our products to smaller end use customers who cannot be served cost effectively by our direct sales forces.

Manufacturing and Operations

        Our Performance Products segment has the capacity to produce more than seven billion pounds annually of a wide variety of specialty, intermediate and commodity products and formulations at 16 manufacturing locations in North America, Europe, Asia and Australia.

        These production capacities are as follows:

 
  Current capacity  
Product Area
  North America   EAME   APAC   Total  
 
  (millions of pounds)
 

Performance Specialties

                         
 

Amines

    706     186 (1)   40     932  
 

Carbonates

    77                 77  
 

Specialty surfactants

    100     175     70     345  

Performance Intermediates

                         
 

EG

    890           55     945  
 

EO

    1,000           100     1,100  
 

Ethanolamines

    400                 400  
 

Ethylene

    400                 400  
 

LAB

    375                 375  
 

Propylene

    300                 300  
 

Surfactants

    470     1,675     30     2,175  

Maleic anhydride

    340     137 (2)         477  

(1)
Includes up to 30 million pounds of ethyleneamines that are made available from Dow's Terneuzen, Netherlands facility by way of a long-term supply arrangement and 60 million pounds

14


Table of Contents

    from our consolidated 50/50 joint venture Arabian Amines Company located in Jubail, Saudi Arabia.

(2)
Represents total capacity of a facility owned by Sasol-Huntsman, of which we own a 50% equity interest and Sasol owns the remaining 50% interest. On April 1, 2008, we announced that Sasol-Huntsman would be expanding its manufacturing capacity by approximately 100 million pounds per year. The new capacity will come online in the first quarter of 2011 and is not included in the production capacity table noted above.

        Our surfactants and amines facilities are located globally, with broad capabilities in amination, sulfonation and ethoxylation. These facilities have a competitive cost base and use modern manufacturing units that allow for flexibility in production capabilities and technical innovation. Through the major restructuring of our surfactant operations, we have significantly improved the competitiveness of our surfactants business.

        Our primary ethylene, propylene, EO, EG and ethanolamines facilities are located in Port Neches, Texas alongside our Polyurethanes' PO/MTBE facility. The Port Neches, Texas facility benefits from extensive logistics infrastructure, which allows for efficient sourcing of other raw materials and distribution of finished products.

        Our LAB facility in Chocolate Bayou, Texas and our maleic anhydride facility in Pensacola, Florida are both located within large, integrated petrochemical manufacturing complexes operated by Ascend. We believe this results in greater scale and lower costs for our products than we would be able to obtain if these facilities were stand-alone operations.

        In 2008, we formed Arabian Amines Company, a joint venture with the Zamil Group, which has constructed an ethyleneamines manufacturing plant in Jubail, Saudi Arabia. Trial production commenced in the second quarter of 2010, and, beginning July 2010, Arabian Amines Company generated significant revenues from the sale of product. The plant has an approximate annual capacity of 60 million pounds. We will purchase and sell all of the production from this joint venture. Arabian Amines Company was accounted for under the equity method during its development stage. We began consolidating this joint venture beginning July 1, 2010.

Raw Materials

        We have the capacity to use approximately 850 million pounds of ethylene each year produced in part at our Port Neches, Texas facility in the production of EO and ethyleneamines. We consume all of our EO in the manufacture of our EG, surfactants and amines products. We also use internally produced PO and DEG in the manufacture of these products. We have the capacity to produce 400 million pounds of ethylene and 300 million pounds of propylene, depending on feedstocks, at our Port Neches, Texas facility. All of the ethylene is used in the production of EO and substantially all of the propylene is consumed by the PO unit at Port Neches operated by our Polyurethanes business. We purchase or toll the remainder of our ethylene and propylene requirements from third parties.

        In addition to internally produced raw materials, our performance specialties market purchases over 250 compounds in varying quantities, the largest of which includes ethylene dichloride, caustic soda, synthetic alcohols, paraffin, nonyl phenol, ammonia, hydrogen, methylamines and acrylonitrile. The majority of these raw materials are available from multiple sources in the merchant market at competitive prices.

        In our performance intermediates market, our primary raw materials, in addition to internally produced and third-party sourced EO and ethylene, are synthetic and natural alcohols, paraffin, alpha olefins, benzene and nonyl phenol. All of these raw materials are widely available in the merchant market at competitive prices.

15


Table of Contents

        Maleic anhydride is produced by the reaction of n-butane with oxygen using our proprietary catalyst. The principal raw material is n-butane which is purchased pursuant to long-term contracts and delivered to our Pensacola, Florida site by barge and to our facility in Geismar, Louisiana via pipeline. Our maleic anhydride catalyst is toll-manufactured by BASF under a long-term contract according to our proprietary methods. These raw materials are available from multiple sources at competitive prices.

Competition

        In our performance specialties market, there are few competitors for many of our products due to the considerable customization of product formulations, the proprietary nature of many of our product applications and manufacturing processes and the relatively high research and development and technical costs involved. Some of our global competitors include BASF, Air Products, Dow, Tosoh, and Akzo. We compete primarily on the basis of product performance, new product innovation and, to a lesser extent, on the basis of price.

        There are numerous global producers of many of our performance intermediates products. Our main competitors include global companies such as Dow, Sasol, BASF, Petresa, Clariant, Shell, Stepan and Kao, as well as various smaller or more local competitors. We compete on the basis of price with respect to the majority of our product offerings and, to a lesser degree, on the basis of product availability, performance and service with respect to certain of our more value-added products.

        In our maleic anhydride market, we compete primarily on the basis of price, customer service and plant location. Our competitors include Lanxess, Flint Hills Resources and Ashland. We are the leading global producer of maleic anhydride catalyst. Competitors in our maleic anhydride catalyst market include Scientific Design and Polynt. In our maleic anhydride technology licensing market, our primary competitor is Scientific Design. We compete primarily on the basis of technological performance and service.

        The market in which our Performance Products segment operates is highly competitive. Among our competitors in this market are some of the world's largest chemical companies and major integrated petroleum companies that have their own raw material resources. Some of these companies may be able to produce products more economically than we can. In addition, some of our competitors in this market have greater financial resources, which may enable them to invest significant capital into their businesses, including expenditures for research and development. If any of our current or future competitors in this market develop proprietary technology that enables them to produce products at a significantly lower cost, our technology could be rendered uneconomical or obsolete.

Advanced Materials

General

        Our Advanced Materials segment is a leading global manufacturer and marketer of technologically advanced epoxy, acrylic and polyurethane-based polymer products. We focus on formulations and systems that are used to address customer-specific needs in a wide variety of industrial and consumer applications. Our products are used either as replacements for traditional materials or in applications where traditional materials do not meet demanding engineering specifications. For example, structural adhesives are used to replace metal rivets and advanced composites are used to replace traditional aluminum panels in the manufacture of aerospace components. Our Advanced Materials segment is characterized by the breadth of our product offering, our expertise in complex chemistry, our long-standing relationships with our customers, our ability to develop and adapt our technology and our applications expertise for new markets and new applications.

        We operate synthesis, formulating and production facilities in North America, Europe, Asia, South America and Africa. We market over 3,000 products to more than 3,000 customers in the following

16


Table of Contents


end-markets: civil engineering, shipbuilding and marine maintenance, consumer appliances, food and beverage packaging, industrial appliances, consumer/do it yourself ("DIY"), aerospace, DVD, LNG transport, electrical power transmission and distribution, printed circuit boards, consumer and industrial electronics, wind power generation, automotive, recreational sports equipment, medical appliances, design studios and prototype manufacturers.

Products and Markets

        Our product range spans from basic liquid and solid resins, to specialty components like curing agents, matting agents, accelerators, cross-linkers, reactive diluents, thermoplastic polyamides and additives. In addition to these components, which we typically sell to formulators in various industries, we also produce and sell ready to use formulated polymer systems.

        Base Resins and Specialty Component Markets.    Our products are used for the protection of steel and concrete substrates, such as flooring, metal furniture and appliances, buildings, linings for storage tanks and food and beverage cans, and the primer coat of automobile bodies and ships. Epoxy-based surface coatings are among the most widely used industrial coatings due to their structural stability and broad application functionality combined with overall economic efficiency.

        Base resins and specialty components are also used for composite applications. A structural composite is made by combining two or more different materials, such as fibers, resins and other specialty additives, to create a product with enhanced structural properties. Specifically, structural composites are lightweight, high-strength, rigid materials with high resistance to chemicals, moisture and high temperatures. Our product range comprises basic and advanced epoxy resins, curing agents and other advanced chemicals, additives and formulated polymer systems. The four key target markets for our structural composites are aerospace, windmill blades for wind power generation, general industrial and automotive applications, and recreational products (mainly sports equipment such as skis). Structural composites continue to substitute for traditional materials, such as metals and wood, in a wide variety of applications due to their light weight, strength and durability.

        Formulated Systems.    The structural adhesives market requires high-strength "engineering" adhesives for use in the manufacture and repair of items to bond various engineering substrates. Our business focus is on engineering adhesives based on epoxy, polyurethane, acrylic and other technologies which are used to bond materials, such as steel, aluminum, engineering plastics and composites in substitution of traditional joining techniques. Our Araldite® brand name has considerable value in the industrial and consumer adhesives markets. In many countries, Araldite® branded products are known for their high-performance adhesive capabilities, and we generally believe that this is the value-added segment of the market where recognition of our long-standing Araldite® brand is a key competitive advantage. Packaging is a key characteristic of our adhesives products. Our range of adhesives is sold in a variety of packs and sizes, targeted to three specific end-markets and sold through targeted routes to market:

    General Industrial Bonding.  We sell a broad range of advanced formulated adhesives to a broad base of small-to medium-sized customers, including specialist distributors.

    Industry Specific.  We sell our adhesive products on a global basis into diverse, industry-specific markets, which include the aerospace, wind turbine, DVD, LNG transport, filterbonding, solar cell and other industrial applications markets. Our target markets are chosen because we believe it is worthwhile to utilize our direct sales force and applications experts to tailor products and services to suit the needs and performance specifications of the specific market segments.

    Consumer/DIY.  We package and sell consumer adhesives through strategic distribution arrangements with a number of the major marketers of consumer/DIY adhesives, such as Bostik

17


Table of Contents

      and Selleys. These products are sold globally through a number of major retail outlets, often under the Araldite® brand name.

        Our electrical materials are formulated polymer systems, which make up the insulation materials used in equipment for the generation, transmission and distribution of electrical power, such as transformers, switch gears, ignition coils, sensors, motors and magnets, and for the protection of electrical and electronic devices and components. The purpose of these products is to insulate, protect or shield either the environment from electrical current or electrical devices from the environment, such as temperature or humidity. Our electrical insulating materials target two key market segments: the heavy electrical equipment market and the light electrical equipment market.

        Products for the heavy electrical equipment market segment are used in power plant components, devices for power grids and insulating parts and components. In addition, there are numerous devices, such as motors and magnetic coils used in trains and medical equipment, which are manufactured using epoxy and related technologies. Products for the light electrical equipment market segment are used in applications such as industrial automation and control, consumer electronics, car electronics and electrical components. The end customers in the electrical insulating materials market encompass the relevant original equipment manufacturer ("OEM") as well as numerous manufacturers of components used in the final products. We also develop, manufacture and market materials used in the production of printed circuit boards. Our products are ultimately used in industries ranging from telecommunications and personal computer mother board manufacture to automotive electronic systems manufacture. Soldermasks are our most important product line in printed circuit board technologies, particularly in Europe. Sales are made mainly under the Probimer®, Probimage®, and Probelec® trademarks. Our Probimer® trademark is a widely recognized brand name for soldermasks.

        We produce polyurethane-based and epoxy formulated polymer systems used in the production of models, prototypes, patterns, molds and a variety of related products for design, prototyping and short-run manufacture. Our products are used extensively in the automotive, aerospace and industrial markets as productivity tools to quickly and efficiently create accurate prototypes and develop experimental models, and to lower the cost of manufacturing items in limited quantities primarily using computer-aided-design techniques. We separate the overall tooling and modeling materials market into two distinct groups—standard tooling and modeling materials and stereolithography technology.

        Our standard tooling and modeling materials are polymer-based materials used by craftsmen to make the traditional patterns, molds, models, jigs and fixtures required by the foundry, automotive, ceramics and other such industries. Stereolithography is a technology that is used to accurately produce physical three-dimensional models directly from computer-aided-design data without cutting, machining or tooling. The models are produced by selectively curing a light-sensitive liquid resin with a laser beam. We sell our stereolithography products to customers in the aerospace, appliance, automotive, consumer, electronics and medical markets.

Sales and Marketing

        We maintain multiple routes to market to service our diverse customer base. These routes to market range from using our own direct sales force for targeted, technically-oriented distribution to mass general distribution. Our direct sales force focuses on engineering solutions for decision-makers at major customers who purchase significant amounts of product from us. We use technically-oriented specialist distributors to augment our sales effort in niche markets and applications where we do not believe it is appropriate to develop direct sales resources. We use mass general distribution channels to sell our products into a wide range of general applications where technical expertise is less important to the user of the products to reduce our overall selling expenses. We believe our use of multiple routes to market enables us to reach a broader customer base at an efficient cost.

18


Table of Contents

        We conduct sales activities through dedicated regional sales teams in the Americas; Europe, Africa, the Middle East and India ("EAMEI"); and Asia. Our global customers are covered by key account managers who are familiar with the specific requirements of these clients. The management of long-standing customer relationships, some of which are 20 to 30 years old, is at the heart of the sales and marketing process. We are also supported by a strong network of distributors. We serve a highly fragmented customer base.

        For our consumer DIY "Do It Yourself" range, we have entered into exclusive branding and distribution arrangements with, for example, Selleys in Australia. Under these arrangements, our distribution partners fund advertising and sales promotions, negotiate and sell to major retail chains, own inventories and provide store deliveries (and sometimes shelf merchandising) in exchange for a reliable, high-quality supply of Araldite® branded, ready-to-sell packaged products.

Manufacturing and Operations

        We are a global business serving customers in three principal geographic regions: EAMEI, the Americas, and Asia. To service our customers efficiently, we maintain manufacturing plants around the world with a strategy of global, regional and local manufacturing employed to optimize the level of service and minimize the cost to our customers. The following table summarizes the plants that we operate:

Location
  Description of Facility
Bad Saeckingen, Germany   Formulating Facility

Bergkamen, Germany

 

Synthesis Facility

Chennai, India(1)

 

Resins and Synthesis Facility

Duxford, U.K. 

 

Formulating Facility

East Lansing, Michigan, U.S. 

 

Formulating Facility

Istanbul, Turkey(2)

 

Formulating Facility

Los Angeles, California, U.S. 

 

Formulating Facility

McIntosh, Alabama, U.S. 

 

Resins and Synthesis Facility

Monthey, Switzerland

 

Resins and Synthesis Facility

Pamplona, Spain

 

Resins and Synthesis Facility

Panyu, China(2)(3)

 

Formulation and Synthesis Facility

Sadat City, Egypt

 

Formulating Facility

Taboão da Serra, Brazil

 

Formulating Facility

(1)
76%-owned and consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Tamilnadu Petroproducts Limited.

(2)
Leased land and/or building.

(3)
95%-owned and consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Guangdong Panyu Shilou Town Economic Development Co. Ltd.

        Our facilities in Asia and India are well-positioned to take advantage of the market growth that is expected in these regions. Furthermore, we believe that we are the largest producer of epoxy resin compounds in India.

19


Table of Contents

Raw Materials

        The principal raw materials we purchase for the manufacture of basic and advanced epoxy resins are epichlorohydrin, bisphenol A and BLR. We also purchase amines, polyols, isocyanates, acrylic materials, hardeners and fillers for the production of our formulated polymer systems and complex chemicals and additives. Raw material costs constitute a sizeable percentage of sales for certain applications. We have supply contracts with a number of suppliers. The terms of our supply contracts vary, but, in general, these contracts contain provisions that set forth the quantities of product to be supplied and purchased and formula-based pricing.

        Additionally, we produce some of our most important raw materials, such as BLR and its basic derivatives, which are the basic building blocks of many of our products. We are the fourth largest producer of BLR in the world. Approximately 50% of the BLR we produce is consumed in the production of our formulated polymer systems. The balance of our BLR is sold as liquid or solid resin in the merchant market, allowing us to increase the utilization of our production plants and lower our overall BLR production cost. We believe that manufacturing a substantial proportion of our principal raw material gives us a competitive advantage over other epoxy-based polymer systems formulators, most of whom must buy BLR from third-party suppliers. This position helps protect us from pricing pressure from BLR suppliers and aids in providing us a stable supply of BLR in difficult market conditions.

        We consume certain amines produced by our Performance Products segment and isocyanates produced by our Polyurethanes segment, which we use to formulate Advanced Materials products.

Competition

        The market in which our Advanced Materials segment operates is highly competitive, and is dependent on significant capital investment, the development of proprietary technology, and maintenance of product research and development. Among our competitors in this market are some of the world's largest chemical companies and major integrated companies that have their own raw material resources.

        Competition in our basic liquid and solid epoxy resins group is primarily driven by price, and is increasingly more global with industry consolidation in the North American and European markets and the emergence of new competitors in Asia. Our major competitors include Dow, Momentive, BASF, Kukdo, Leuna and NanYa.

        Competition in our specialty components and structural composites product group is primarily driven by product performance, applications expertise and customer certification. Our competitive strengths include our strong technology base, broad range of value-added products, leading market positions, diverse customer base and reputation for customer service. Major competitors include Air Products, Arizona, Momentive, BASF, Cray Valley, Evonics, DIC, Dow, Mitsui, Sumitomo and NanYa.

        Competition in our formulation product group is primarily based on technology, know-how, applications and formulations expertise, product reliability and performance, process expertise and technical support. This product group covers a wide range of industries and the key competition factors vary by industry. Our competitive strengths result from our focus on defined market needs, our long-standing customer relationships, product reliability and technical performance, provision of high level service and recognition as a quality supplier in our chosen sectors. We operate dedicated

20


Table of Contents


technology centers in Basel, Switzerland; The Woodlands, Texas; and Panyu, China in support of our product and technology development. Our major competitors can be summarized as follows:

Formulation Product Group
  Competition
Adhesives applications   Henkel/Loctite, ITW, National Starch, Sika, 3M

Electrical insulating materials

 

Altana, Hexion, Schenectady, Wuxi, Dexter-Hysol, Hitachi Chemical, Nagase Chemtex, Toshiba Chemical

Printed circuit board materials

 

Coates, Goo, Peters, Taiyo Ink, Tamura

Tooling and modeling solution. 

 

Axson, DSM, Sika

Textile Effects

General

        Our Textile Effects segment is the leading global market share provider for textile chemicals and dyes. Our textile solutions enhance the color of finished textiles and improve such performance characteristics as wrinkle resistance and the ability to repel water and stains. Our Textile Effects segment is characterized by the breadth of our product offering, our long-standing relationships with our customers, our ability to develop and adapt our technology and our applications expertise for new markets and new applications.

        We operate synthesis, formulating and production facilities in North America, Europe, Asia and South America. We market multiple products to customers in multiple end-markets, including the following: consumer fashion apparel, sportswear, career and uniform apparel, military, automotive, home textiles and furnishings, carpet and other functional textiles.

        In June 2010, we announced a restructuring program for our Basel, Switzerland site of our Textile Effects segment. It would involve the consolidation of manufacturing activities and processes at the site, as well as the introduction of changes in work organization, with the aim of increasing flexibility while preserving existing capacities and ensuring competitiveness in Basel. We expect to spend approximately $16 million over approximately the next year to complete this project. We have targeted approximately $17 million in annual savings when the restructuring is fully completed.

Products and Markets

        Textiles generally involve a complex matrix of fibers, effects and functionality, and the resulting products range from fashion apparel to bulletproof vests, home linens to air and water filters, and upholstery to automotive interiors. Our broad range of dyestuffs and chemicals enhance both the aesthetic appearance of these products and the functionality needed to ensure that they perform in their end-use markets. Since the requirements for these markets vary dramatically, our business strategy focuses on the two major markets—apparel and technical textiles. We work to provide the right balance of products and service to meet the technical challenges in each of these markets.

        The apparel market, which also includes our home interiors products, focuses on products that provide an aesthetic effect and/or improve the processing efficiency within the textile mill. We offer a complete range of colors for cotton, polyester and nylon that cover the range of shades needed for sportswear, intimate apparel, towels, sheeting and casual wear. Our dyes have been developed to ensure that they offer the highest levels of wash fastness currently available in the market. Optical brighteners and other pretreatment products provide "bright white" effects for apparel, towels and sheeting. Pretreatment and dyeing auxiliaries ensure that these fabrics are processed efficiently and effectively—

21


Table of Contents


cleaning the fabrics with fewer chemicals, less energy and less water and thereby minimizing the environmental footprint and reducing the processing costs. Silicone softeners may be used to enhance the feel of products.

        Technical textiles include automotive textiles, carpet, military fabrics, mattress ticking and nonwoven and other technical fabrics. Though the product groups may differ in their end-uses, the articles must provide a high-level of functionality and performance in their respective markets. High-lightfast dyes and UV absorbers are used in automotive interiors and outdoor furnishings to provide colors that don't fade when exposed to sunlight and heat. Powerful stain repellent and release technology imparts durable protection for upholstery, military and medical fabrics, without affecting the color, breathability or feel of the fabric. Specialized dyes and prints create unique camouflage patterns for military uniforms, backpacks and tarps that won't fade through wash and wear or during exposure to the elements.

Sales and Marketing

        For our textile effects products, we focus on providing effect competence and process competence to our customers. Effect competence—delivering value-added effects to our customer's products—enables us to capitalize on new and innovative technologies and to assist our customers in their efforts to differentiate themselves from competitors. Process competence—applying know-how and expertise to improve customers' processes—allows us to utilize our technical service to reduce cost and enhance efficiency.

Manufacturing and Operations

        We are a global business serving customers in three principal geographic regions: Europe, Africa and the Middle East ("EAME"), the Americas, and Asia. To service our customers efficiently, we maintain manufacturing plants around the world with a strategy of global, regional and local

22


Table of Contents


manufacturing employed to optimize the level of service and minimize the cost to our customers. The following table summarizes the plants that we operate:

Location
  Description of Facility

Atotonilquillo, Mexico

  Textile Dyes and Chemicals Formulations Facility

Baroda, India

 

Textile Dyes and Chemicals Synthesis Facility

Basel, Switzerland(1)

 

Textile Dyes Facility and Technology Center

Bogota, Colombia(1)

 

Chemicals Formulations Facility

Charlotte, North Carolina, U.S.(1)

 

Chemicals Formulations Facility

Fraijanes, Guatemala(1)

 

Chemicals Formulations Facility

Gandaria, Jakarta, Indonesia

 

Textile Dyes and Chemicals Formulations Facility

Hangzhou, China(1)

 

Chemicals Formulations Facility

Istanbul, Turkey(1)

 

Chemicals Formulations Facility

Karachi, Pakistan(1)

 

Chemicals Formulations Facility

Langweid am Leich, Germany(1)

 

Chemicals Synthesis Facility

Panyu, China(1)(2)

 

Chemicals Synthesis Facility and Technology Center

Qingdao, China

 

Textile Dyes Facility

Samutsakorn (Mahachai), Thailand(1)

 

Textile Dyes and Chemicals Formulations Facility


(1)
Leased land and/or building.

(2)
95%-owned and consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Guangdong Panyu Shilou Town Economic Development Co. Ltd.

Raw Materials

        The manufacture of textile effects products requires a wide selection of raw materials (approximately 1,200 different chemicals), including amines, fluorochemicals and sulfones. No one raw material represents greater than 3% of our textile effects raw material expenditures. Raw material costs constitute a sizeable percentage of sales for certain applications. We have supply contracts with a number of suppliers. The terms of our supply contracts vary, but, in general, these contracts contain provisions that set forth the quantities of product to be supplied and purchased and formula-based pricing.

Competition

        We are the leading global market share provider for textile chemicals and dyes. Competition within the textile chemicals and dyes markets is generally fragmented with few competitors who offer complete solutions for both markets. Our major competitors are Clariant, BASF, Kiri-Dystar and Longsheng. We believe that our competitive strengths include our product offering, which is characterized by its broad

23


Table of Contents


range; high quality; significant integration between products and service; reliable technical expertise; long-standing relationships with customers; and strong business infrastructure in Asia. We believe that we have more customer service capability and account management capability than any of our competitors worldwide.

Pigments

General

        We are a leading global manufacturer and marketer of titanium dioxide, which is a white pigment used to impart whiteness, brightness and opacity to products such as paints, plastics, paper, printing inks, fibers and ceramics. We operate seven titanium dioxide manufacturing facilities located in North America, Europe, Asia and Africa. The global titanium dioxide market is characterized by a small number of large, global producers and a growing compliment of smaller regional producers.

        We offer an extensive range of products, under the Tioxide® and Deltio® brand names, to approximately 1,500 customers in all major titanium dioxide end markets and geographic regions. The geographic diversity of our manufacturing facilities allows our Pigments segment to service local customers, as well as global customers that require delivery to more than one location. Our diverse customer base includes Ampacet, A. Schulman, Akzo Nobel, BASF, Cabot, Clariant, Jotun, PolyOne and PPG. Our pigments business has an aggregate annual nameplate capacity of approximately 560,000 tonnes at our seven production facilities. Four of our titanium dioxide manufacturing plants are located in Europe, one is in North America, one is in Asia, and one is in South Africa. Our North American operation consists of a 50% interest in a manufacturing joint venture with Kronos Worldwide, Inc.

        Our Pigments segment is focused on improving our competitive position and providing customers with innovative products and solutions. In 2008, to further our competitive position we expanded the capacity of our Greatham, U.K. chloride-based facility by 50% to 150,000 tonnes per year. During the first quarter of 2009, we closed our Grimsby, U.K. sulphate-based facility. We recently announced an agreement in principle to an investment of approximately €30 million (approximately $40 million) to build a new magnesium sulfate fertilizer manufacturing operation at our plant in Calais, France. The new facility will enable the closure of part of our Calais effluent treatment plant, which is expected to increase the efficiency, sustainability and cost effectiveness of the entire Calais site. We continue to pursue other projects to improve manufacturing costs at each of our facilities. We are also introducing a number of innovative new products to the market, including our Deltio® range of free-flowing pigments.

Products and Markets

        Historically, global titanium dioxide demand growth rates tend to closely track global GDP growth rates. However, the demand growth rate and its relationship with the GDP growth rate varies by region. Developed markets such as the U.S. and Western Europe exhibit higher absolute consumption but lower demand growth rates, while emerging markets such as Asia exhibit much higher demand growth rates. The titanium dioxide industry experiences some seasonality in its sales reflecting the high exposure to seasonal coatings end use markets. Coating sales generally peak during the spring and summer months in the northern hemisphere, resulting in greater sales volumes during the second and third quarters of the year.

        There are two manufacturing processes for the production of titanium dioxide, the sulfate process and the chloride process. Most recent capacity additions by the five major producers have employed the chloride process technology while those by smaller producers have generally used the sulphate process technology. We currently believe that the chloride process accounts for approximately 55% of global production capacity. However, the global distribution of sulfate- and chloride-based titanium dioxide capacity varies by region, with the sulfate process being predominant in Europe, our primary market.

24


Table of Contents


The chloride process is the predominant process used in North America, and both processes are used in Asia. While most end use applications can use pigments produced by either process, regional market preferences typically favor products that are locally available. We believe the chloride and sulfate manufacturing processes compete effectively in the marketplace.

        Aside from the five major producers, the titanium dioxide industry currently has a large number of small regional or local producers, especially in China. Titanium dioxide supply has historically kept pace with increases in demand as producers increased capacity through low cost incremental debottlenecks, efficiency improvements and, more recently, new capacity additions in China. During periods of low titanium dioxide demand, the industry experiences high stock levels and consequently reduces production to manage working capital. Pricing in the industry is driven primarily by supply/demand balance. Based upon current price levels and the long lead times for planning, governmental approvals and construction, we expect supply to continue for the near term in line with historical demand growth.

Sales and Marketing

        Approximately 85% of our titanium dioxide sales are made through our direct sales and technical services network, enabling us to cooperate more closely with our customers and to respond to our increasingly global customer base. Our concentrated sales effort and local manufacturing presence have allowed us to achieve our leading market shares in a number of the countries where we manufacture titanium dioxide.

        In addition, we have focused on marketing products to higher growth industries. For example, we believe that our pigments business is well-positioned to benefit from the projected growth in the plastics sector which we expect to grow faster than the overall titanium dioxide market over the next several years.

Manufacturing and Operations

        Our pigments business has eight manufacturing sites in seven countries with a total capacity of approximately 560,000 tonnes per year. Approximately 72% of our titanium dioxide capacity is located in Western Europe. The following table presents information regarding our titanium dioxide facilities:

Region
  Site   Annual Capacity (tonnes)   Process

Western Europe

  Greatham, U.K.     150,000   Chloride

  Calais, France     95,000   Sulfate

  Huelva, Spain     80,000   Sulfate

  Scarlino, Italy     80,000   Sulfate

North America

 

Lake Charles, Louisiana(1)

   
70,000
 

Chloride

Asia

 

Teluk Kalung, Malaysia

   
60,000
 

Sulfate

Southern Africa

 

Umbogintwini, South Africa

   
25,000
 

Sulfate

             

Total

        560,000    
             

(1)
This facility is owned and operated by Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P., a manufacturing joint venture that is owned 50% by us and 50% by Kronos Worldwide. The capacity shown reflects our 50% interest in Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P.

        In 2008, we completed the expansion of our Greatham, U.K. facility by 50,000 tonnes. We are also well positioned to selectively invest in new plant capacity based upon our ICON chloride technology. ICON technology allows for the construction of new capacity with world-scale economics at a minimum

25


Table of Contents


nameplate size of 65,000 tonnes. We believe competing chloride technologies typically require a minimum capacity of 100,000 tonnes to achieve comparable economics. Our chloride additions can be more easily absorbed into the market, which provides higher investment returns than larger capacity additions.

Joint Venture

        Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P. is our 50/50 joint venture with Kronos Worldwide. We share production offtake and operating costs of the plant equally with Kronos Worldwide, though we market our share of the production independently. The operations of the joint venture are under the direction of a supervisory committee on which each partner has equal representation. Our investment in Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P. is accounted for using the equity method.

Raw Materials

        The primary raw materials used to produce titanium dioxide are titanium-bearing ores. We purchase the majority of our ore under long-term supply contracts with a number of ore suppliers. The majority of titanium-bearing ores are sourced from Australia, South Africa and Canada. Ore accounts for approximately 45% of pigment variable manufacturing costs, while utilities (electricity, gas and steam), sulfuric acid and chlorine collectively account for approximately 30% of our variable manufacturing costs.

        The world market for titanium bearing ores is characterized by a small number of large suppliers (Rio Tinto, Iluka and Exxaro) which account for approximately 60% of global supply and from which we purchase approximately 60% of our needs. However, the choice of producers has increased in recent years with a number of emerging suppliers based in India and Africa and we have broadened our supply base by purchasing increasing amounts of our ores from these suppliers. The majority of our ore purchases are made under agreements with terms of three or more years.

        Titanium dioxide producers extract titanium from ores and process it into pigmentary titanium dioxide using either the chloride or sulfate process. Once an intermediate titanium dioxide pigment has been produced, it is "finished" into a product with specific performance characteristics for particular end use applications. The finishing process is common to both the sulfate and chloride processes and is a major determinant of the final product's performance characteristics.

        The sulfate process generally uses less-refined ores that are cheaper to purchase but produce more co-product than the chloride process. Co-products from both processes require treatment prior to disposal in order to comply with environmental regulations. In order to reduce our disposal costs and to increase our cost competitiveness, we have developed and marketed the co-products of our pigments business. We sell over 50% of the co-products generated by our business.

Competition

        The global markets in which our pigments business operates are highly competitive. Competition is based primarily on price. In addition, we also compete on the basis of product quality and service. The major global producers against whom we compete are DuPont, Tronox, Kronos and Cristal, each of which has a global presence and the ability to service all global markets. Some of our competitors may be able to produce products more economically than we can. In addition, some of our competitors in this market have greater financial resources, which may enable them to invest significant capital into their businesses, including expenditures for research and development. If any of our current or future competitors in this market develops proprietary technology that enables them to produce products at a significantly lower cost, our technology could be rendered uneconomical or obsolete. Moreover, the sulphate-based titanium dioxide technology used by our Pigments business is widely available. Accordingly, barriers to entry, apart from capital availability, may be low and the entrance of new

26


Table of Contents


competitors into the industry may reduce our ability to capture improving profit margins in circumstances where capacity utilization in the industry is increasing.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT

        For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, we spent $151 million, $145 million and $154 million, respectively, on research and development.

        We support our business with a major commitment to research and development, technical services and process engineering improvement. Our research and development centers are located in The Woodlands, Texas, Everberg, Belgium, and Shanghai, China. Other regional development/technical service centers are located in Billingham, England (pigments); Auburn Hills, Michigan (polyurethanes for the automotive industry); Derry, New Hampshire, Shanghai, China, Deggendorf, Germany and Ternate, Italy (polyurethanes); Melbourne, Australia (surfactants); Port Neches, Texas (process engineering support); Basel, Switzerland and Panyu, China (advanced materials and textile effects); and Mumbai, India (textile effects).

INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS

        Proprietary protection of our processes, apparatuses, and other technology and inventions is important to our businesses. We own approximately 560 unexpired U.S. patents, approximately 155 patent applications (including provisionals) currently pending at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, and approximately 3,650 foreign counterparts, including both issued patents and pending patent applications. While a presumption of validity exists with respect to issued U.S. patents, we cannot assure that any of our patents will not be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or rendered unenforceable. Furthermore, we cannot assure the issuance of any pending patent application, or that if patents do issue, that these patents will provide meaningful protection against competitors or against competitive technologies. Additionally, our competitors or other third parties may obtain patents that restrict or preclude our ability to lawfully produce or sell our products in a competitive manner.

        We also rely upon unpatented proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation and other trade secrets to develop and maintain our competitive position. There can be no assurance, however, that confidentiality agreements into which we enter and have entered will not be breached, that they will provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets or proprietary know-how, or that adequate remedies will be available in the event of an unauthorized use or disclosure of such trade secrets and know-how. In addition, there can be no assurance that others will not obtain knowledge of these trade secrets through independent development or other access by legal means.

        In addition to our own patents and patent applications and proprietary trade secrets and know-how, we are a party to certain licensing arrangements and other agreements authorizing us to use trade secrets, know-how and related technology and/or operate within the scope of certain patents owned by other entities. We also have licensed or sub-licensed intellectual property rights to third parties.

        We have associated brand names with a number of our products, and we have approximately 140 U.S. trademark registrations (including applications for registration currently pending at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office), and approximately 4,890 foreign counterparts, including both registrations and applications for registration. Some of these registrations and applications include filings under the Madrid system for the international registration of marks and may confer rights in multiple countries. However, there can be no assurance that the trademark registrations will provide meaningful protection against the use of similar trademarks by competitors, or that the value of our trademarks will not be diluted.

27


Table of Contents

        Because of the breadth and nature of our intellectual property rights and our business, we do not believe that any single intellectual property right (other than certain trademarks for which we intend to maintain the applicable registrations) is material to our business. Moreover, we do not believe that the termination of intellectual property rights expected to occur over the next several years, either individually or in the aggregate, will materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

EMPLOYEES

        As of December 31, 2010, we employed approximately 12,000 people in our operations around the world. Approximately 2,000 of these employees are located in the U.S., while approximately 10,000 are located in other countries. We believe our relations with our employees are good.

ENVIRONMENTAL, HEALTH AND SAFETY MATTERS

General

        We are subject to extensive federal, state, local and international laws, regulations, rules and ordinances relating to safety, pollution, protection of the environment and the generation, storage, handling, transportation, treatment, disposal and remediation of hazardous substances and waste materials. In the ordinary course of business, we are subject to frequent environmental inspections and monitoring and occasional investigations by governmental enforcement authorities. In addition, our production facilities require operating permits that are subject to renewal, modification and, in certain circumstances, revocation. Actual or alleged violations of safety laws, environmental laws or permit requirements could result in restrictions or prohibitions on plant operations, substantial civil or criminal sanctions, as well as, under some environmental laws, the assessment of strict liability and/or joint and several liability. Moreover, changes in environmental regulations could inhibit or interrupt our operations, or require us to modify our facilities or operations. Accordingly, environmental or regulatory matters may cause us to incur significant unanticipated losses, costs or liabilities.

Environmental, Health and Safety Systems

        We are committed to achieving and maintaining compliance with all applicable EHS legal requirements, and we have developed policies and management systems that are intended to identify the multitude of EHS legal requirements applicable to our operations, enhance compliance with applicable legal requirements, ensure the safety of our employees, contractors, community neighbors and customers and minimize the production and emission of wastes and other pollutants. Although EHS legal requirements are constantly changing and are frequently difficult to comply with, these EHS management systems are designed to assist us in our compliance goals while also fostering efficiency and improvement and minimizing overall risk to us.

EHS Capital Expenditures

        We may incur future costs for capital improvements and general compliance under EHS laws, including costs to acquire, maintain and repair pollution control equipment. For the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008, our capital expenditures for EHS matters totaled $85 million, $54 million and $58 million, respectively. Because capital expenditures for these matters are subject to evolving regulatory requirements and depend, in part, on the timing, promulgation and enforcement of specific requirements, our capital expenditures for EHS matters have varied significantly from year to year and we cannot provide assurance that our recent expenditures will be indicative of future amounts required under EHS laws.

28


Table of Contents

Remediation Liabilities

        We have incurred, and we may in the future incur, liability to investigate and clean up waste or contamination at our current or former facilities or facilities operated by third parties at which we may have disposed of waste or other materials. Similarly, we may incur costs for the cleanup of waste that was disposed of prior to the purchase of our businesses. Under some circumstances, the scope of our liability may extend to damages to natural resources.

        Under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA") and similar state laws, a current or former owner or operator of real property may be liable for remediation costs regardless of whether the release or disposal of hazardous substances was in compliance with law at the time it occurred, and a current owner or operator may be liable regardless of whether it owned or operated the facility at the time of the release. Outside the U.S., analogous contaminated property laws, such as those in effect in France and Australia, can hold past owners and/or operators liable for remediation at former facilities. We have been notified by third parties of claims against us for cleanup liabilities at approximately 10 former facilities or third party sites, including, but not limited to, sites listed under CERCLA. Based on current information and past experiences at other CERCLA sites, we do not expect any of these third party claims to result in material liability to us.

        One of these sites, the North Maybe Canyon Mine CERCLA site, includes an abandoned phosphorous mine near Soda Springs, Idaho believed to have been operated by one of our predecessor companies (El Paso Products Company). In 2004, the U.S. Forest Service notified us that we are a CERCLA Potentially Responsible Party (a "PRP") for the mine site involving selenium-contaminated surface water. Under a 2004 administrative order, the current mine lessee, Nu-West Industries, Inc., began undertaking the investigation required for a CERCLA removal process. In 2008, the site was transitioned to the CERCLA remedial action process, which requires a Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study (an "RI/FS"). In 2009, the Forest Service notified the three PRPs (our Company, Nu-West and Wells Cargo) that it would undertake the RI/FS itself. On February 19, 2010, in conjunction with Wells Cargo, we agreed to jointly comply with a unilateral administrative order (a "UAO") to conduct an RI/FS of the entire West Ridge of the site, although we are alleged to have had only a limited historical presence in the investigation area. In March 2010, following the initiation of litigation by Nu-West, the Forest Service assumed Nu-West's original investigation obligations. On June 15, 2010, we received the UAO which had been executed by the Forest Service and we are presently carrying out the requirements of the order. We continue to coordinate with our insurers regarding policy coverage in this matter. At this time, we are unable to estimate the cost of the RI/FS or our ultimate liability in this matter, but we do not believe it will be material to our financial condition, results of operations or cash flow.

        In addition, under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRA") and similar state laws, we may be required to remediate contamination originating from our properties as a condition to our hazardous waste permit. Some of our manufacturing sites have an extended history of industrial chemical manufacturing and use, including on-site waste disposal. We are aware of soil, groundwater or surface contamination from past operations at some of our sites, and we may find contamination at other sites in the future. For example, our Port Neches, Texas, and Geismar, Louisiana, facilities are the subject of ongoing remediation requirements under RCRA authority. Similar laws exist in a number of locations in which we currently operate, or previously operated, manufacturing facilities, such as Australia, Switzerland and Italy.

        In June of 2006, an agreement was reached between the local regulatory authorities and our Advanced Materials site in Pamplona, Spain to relocate our manufacturing operations in order to facilitate new urban development desired by the city. Subsequently, as required by the authorities, soil and groundwater sampling was performed and followed by a quantitative risk assessment. In October

29


Table of Contents


2010, the local authorities approved our proposed two-phase remedial approach. The first phase, to be initiated in 2011, will involve groundwater extraction and treatment in one limited area of the site. The second phase, not yet defined, would proceed during site redevelopment. However, because of the current economic conditions in Spain, we believe that the urban development plans have been postponed for the immediate future. Therefore, we are unable to further assess the timing, likelihood or amount of any potential liability.

        By letter dated March 7, 2006, our Base Chemicals and Polymers facility in West Footscray, Australia, was issued a clean-up notice by the Environment Protection Authority, Victoria, Australia (the "EPA Victoria") due to concerns about soil and groundwater contamination emanating from the site. The agency revoked the original clean-up notice on September 4, 2007 and issued a revised clean-up notice due to "the complexity of contamination issues" at the site. In the third quarter of 2009, we recorded a $30 million liability related to estimated environmental remediation costs at this site. On August 23, 2010, EPA Victoria revoked the second clean-up notice and issued a revised notice that included a requirement for financial assurance for the remediation. We have now reached agreement with the agency that a mortgage on the land will be held by the agency as financial surety during the period of current clean-up notice, which ends on July 30, 2014. We can provide no assurance that the agency will not seek to institute additional requirements for the site or that additional costs will not be associated with the clean up. This facility has been closed and demolition, which commenced in May 2010, is expected to be completed by mid-2011.

        By letter of March 15, 2010, the U.S. Department of Justice (the "DOJ") notified us that the EPA has requested that the DOJ bring an action in federal court against us and other PRPs for recovery of costs incurred by the U.S. in connection with releases of hazardous substances from the State Marine Superfund Site in Port Arthur, Texas. As of August 31, 2007, the EPA had incurred and paid approximately $2.8 million in unreimbursed response costs related to the site. Prior to filing the complaint, the DOJ requested that PRPs sign and return a standard tolling agreement (from March 31, 2010 through September 30, 2010) and participate in settlement discussions. We originally responded to an information request regarding this site on March 7, 2005 and identified historical transactions associated with a predecessor of a company we acquired. The prior owners have contractually agreed to indemnify us in this matter. While the DOJ is aware of the indemnity, we may be required to participate in future settlement discussions; therefore, on March 29, 2010, we submitted the signed tolling agreement and offer to negotiate to the DOJ. The tolling agreement has since been extended until March 31, 2011.

        In many cases, our potential liability arising from historical contamination is based on operations and other events occurring prior to our ownership of a business or specific facility. In these situations, we frequently obtained an indemnity agreement from the prior owner addressing remediation liabilities arising from pre-closing conditions. We have successfully exercised our rights under these contractual covenants for a number of sites and, where applicable, mitigated our ultimate remediation liability. We cannot assure you, however, that the liabilities for all such matters subject to indemnity, will be honored by the prior owner or that our existing indemnities will be sufficient to cover our liabilities for such matters.

        Based on available information and the indemnification rights we believe are likely to be available, we believe that the costs to investigate and remediate known contamination will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. However, if such indemnities are not honored or do not fully cover the costs of investigation and remediation or we are required to contribute to such costs, then such expenditures may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. At the current time, we are unable to estimate the total cost, exclusive of indemnification benefits, to remediate any of the known contamination sites.

30


Table of Contents

Environmental Reserves

        We have accrued liabilities relating to anticipated environmental cleanup obligations, site reclamation and closure costs and known penalties. Liabilities are recorded when potential liabilities are either known or considered probable and can be reasonably estimated. Our liability estimates are calculated using present value techniques and are based upon requirements placed upon us by regulators, available facts, existing technology and past experience. The environmental liabilities do not include amounts recorded as asset retirement obligations. We had accrued $48 million and $41 million for environmental liabilities as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. Of these amounts, $13 million and $5 million were classified as accrued liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively, and $35 million and $36 million were classified as other noncurrent liabilities in our consolidated balance sheets as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. In certain cases, our remediation liabilities may be payable over periods of up to 30 years. We may incur losses for environmental remediation in excess of the amounts accrued; however, we are not able to estimate the amount or range of such potential excess.

REGULATORY DEVELOPMENTS

        In December 2006, the EU parliament and EU council approved a new EU regulatory framework for chemicals called "REACH" (Registration, Evaluation and Authorization of Chemicals). REACH took effect on June 1, 2007, and the program it establishes will be phased in over 11 years. Under the regulation, companies that manufacture in or import into the European Economic Area ("EEA") more than one metric tonne of a chemical substance per year will be required to register such chemical substances and isolated intermediates in a central database. Use authorizations will be granted for a specific chemical if the applicants can show that the risks in using the chemical are adequately controlled; and for chemicals where there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies available and the applicant can demonstrate that the social and economic benefits of using the chemical outweigh the risks. In addition, specified uses of some hazardous substances may be restricted. Furthermore, all applicants will have to study the availability of alternative chemicals. If an alternative is available, an applicant will have to submit a "substitution" plan to the regulatory agency. The regulatory agency will only authorize persistent bio-accumulative and toxic substances if an alternative chemical is not available. The registration, evaluation and authorization phases of the program will require expenditures and resource commitments in order to, for example, participate in mandatory data-sharing forums; acquire, generate and evaluate data; prepare and submit dossiers for substance registration; obtain legal advice and reformulate products, if necessary. We have established a cross-business European REACH team that is working closely with our businesses to identify and list all substances we purchase or manufacture in, or import into, the EEA. We met pre-registration REACH compliance requirements by the November 30, 2008 regulatory deadline, with the exception of pre-registrations for two substances, for a total of 1,850 pre-registrations for substances that we intended to register. These two substances, along with the other high-volume and high-priority chemicals, were successfully registered under the program by the November 30, 2010 regulatory deadline. Although the total long-term cost for REACH compliance is not estimable at this time, we spent approximately $9 million, $3 million and $2 million in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively, on REACH compliance. However, we cannot provide assurance that these recent expenditures will be indicative of future amounts required for REACH compliance.

GREENHOUSE GAS REGULATION

        Although the existence of binding emissions limitations under international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol is in doubt after 2012, we expect some or all of our operations to be subject to regulatory requirements to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases ("GHG"). Even in the absence of a new global agreement to limit GHGs, we may be subject to additional regulation under the European

31


Table of Contents


Union Emissions Trading System as well as new national and regional GHG trading programs. For example, our operations in Australia and selected U.S. states may be subject to future GHG regulations under emissions trading systems in those jurisdictions.

        Because the United States has not adopted federal climate change legislation, domestic GHG efforts are likely to be guided by EPA regulations in the near future. While EPA's GHG programs are currently subject to judicial challenge, our domestic operations may become subject to EPA's regulatory requirements when implemented. In particular, expansions of our existing facilities or construction of new facilities may be subject to the Clean Air Act's Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements under EPA's GHG "Tailoring Rule." In addition, certain aspects of our operations may be subject to GHG emissions monitoring and reporting requirements. If we are subject to EPA GHG regulations, we may face increased monitoring, reporting, and compliance costs.

        We are already managing and reporting GHG emissions, to varying degrees, as required by law for our sites in locations subject to Kyoto Protocol obligations and/or EU emissions trading scheme requirements. Although these sites are subject to existing GHG legislation, few have experienced or anticipate significant cost increases as a result of these programs, although it is possible that GHG emission restrictions may increase over time. Potential consequences of such restrictions include capital requirements to modify assets to meet GHG emission restrictions and/or increases in energy costs above the level of general inflation, as well as direct compliance costs. Currently, however, it is not possible to estimate the likely financial impact of potential future regulation on any of our sites.

        Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHG in the Earth's atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, and floods and other climatic events. If any of those effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our assets and operations.

CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM RULEMAKING

        The U.S. Department of Homeland Security ("DHS") issued the final rule of their "Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standard" in 2007. The initial phase of the rule required all chemical facilities in the U.S. to evaluate their facilities against the DHS Appendix A list of "Chemicals of Interest." Facilities which have specified chemicals in threshold quantities on the Appendix A list were required to submit a "Top Screen" questionnaire to DHS in 2008. In early 2008, we submitted Top Screens for all of our covered facilities. After reviewing the Top Screens, DHS determined that four of our sites were "High Risk" facilities. As a result, we were required to perform security vulnerability assessments at the High Risk sites. The security vulnerability assessments were completed and sent to DHS during the fourth quarter of 2008. Based on their assessment of the security vulnerability assessments, we received notice from DHS that one of our sites was elevated to a high security risk tier. The DHS determined the other three sites to be lower security risk tiers. The three lower-tiered sites have submitted Site Security Plans ("SSPs") to the DHS. The SSPs are based on a list of 18 risk-based performance standards, but security improvements recommended from the SSPs are not anticipated to be material. The high tiered site also submitted an SSP to the DHS, and security upgrades as a result of DHS requirements are estimated to cost $8 million to $10 million to be spent during 2011 and 2012.

MTBE DEVELOPMENTS

        We produce MTBE, an oxygenate that is blended with gasoline to reduce vehicle air emissions and to enhance the octane rating of gasoline. Litigation or legislative initiatives restricting the use of MTBE in gasoline may subject us or our products to environmental liability or materially adversely affect our sales and costs. Because MTBE has contaminated some water supplies, its use has become controversial in the U.S. and elsewhere, and its use has been effectively eliminated in the U.S. market. We currently market MTBE, either directly or through third parties, to gasoline additive customers

32


Table of Contents


located outside the U.S., although there are additional costs associated with such outside-U.S. sales which may result in decreased profitability compared to historical sales in the U.S. We may also elect to use all or a portion of our precursor TBA to produce saleable products other than MTBE. If we opt to produce products other than MTBE, necessary modifications to our facilities will require significant capital expenditures and the sale of such other products may produce a lower level of cash flow than that historically produced from the sale of MTBE.

        Numerous companies, including refiners, manufacturers and sellers of gasoline, as well as manufacturers of MTBE, have been named as defendants in numerous cases in U.S. courts that allege MTBE contamination in groundwater. The plaintiffs in the MTBE groundwater contamination cases generally seek compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, such as monitoring and abatement, and attorney fees. Between 2007 and 2009, we were named as a defendant in 18 of these lawsuits in New York state and federal courts, which we settled in an amount immaterial to us.

        It is possible that we could be named as a defendant in existing or future MTBE contamination cases. We cannot provide assurances that adverse results against us in existing or future MTBE contamination cases will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial position.

INDIA INVESTIGATION

        During the third quarter of 2010, we completed an internal investigation of the operations of Petro Araldite Pvt. Ltd. ("PAPL"), our majority owned joint venture in India. PAPL manufactures base liquid resins, base solid resins and formulated products in India. The investigation initially focused on allegations of illegal disposal of hazardous waste and waste water discharge and related reporting irregularities. Based upon preliminary findings, the investigation was expanded to include a review of the production and off-book sales of certain products and waste products. The investigation included the legality under Indian law and U.S. law, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, of certain payments made by employees of the joint venture to government officials in India. Records at the facility covering nine months in 2009 and early 2010 show that less than $11,000 in payments were made to officials for that period; in addition, payments in unknown amounts may have been made by individuals from the facility in previous years.

        In May and July 2010, PAPL fully disclosed the environmental noncompliance issues to the local Indian environmental agency, the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board ("TNPCB"). All environmental compliance and reporting issues have been addressed to the agency's satisfaction other than the use of freshwater for the dilution of wastewater effluent discharges and the remediation of several off-site solid waste disposal areas. Also in May 2010, we voluntarily contacted the SEC and the DOJ to advise them of our investigation and that we intend to cooperate fully with each of them. We met with the SEC and the DOJ in early October to discuss this matter and continue to cooperate with these agencies. Steps have been taken to halt all known illegal or improper activity. These steps included the termination of employment of management employees as appropriate. In November 2010, directions were received from TNPCB to submit a plan for the remediation of the off-site waste disposal areas.

        No conclusions can be drawn at this time as to whether any government agencies will open formal investigations of these matters or what remedies such agencies may seek. Governmental agencies could assess material civil and criminal penalties and fines against PAPL and potentially against us and could issue orders that adversely affect the operations of PAPL. We cannot, however, determine at this time the magnitude of the penalties and fines that could be assessed, the total costs to remediate the prior noncompliance or the effects of implementing any necessary corrective measures on the PAPL's operations.

33


Table of Contents

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

        We maintain an internet website at http://www.huntsman.com. Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to these reports are available free of charge through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we file this material with the SEC. We also provide electronic or paper copies of our SEC filings free of charge upon request.

GLOSSARY OF CHEMICAL TERMS

DEG—di-ethylene glycol
BDO—butane diol
DGA® Agent—DIGLYCOLAMINE® agent
EG—ethylene glycol
EO—ethylene oxide
LAB—linear alkyl benzene
LAS—linear alkylbenzene sulfonate
LER—liquid epoxy resins
LNG—liquefied natural gas
MEG—mono-ethylene glycol
MDI—methyl diphenyl diisocyanate
MTBE—methyl tertiary-butyl ether
PG—propylene glycol
PO—propylene oxide

Polyols—a substance containing several hydroxyl groups. A diol, triol and tetrol contain two, three and four hydroxyl groups respectively

TBA—tertiary butyl alcohol
TBHP—tert-butyl hydroperoxide
TDI—toluene diisocyanate
TEG—tri-ethylene glycol
TiO2—titanium dioxide pigment
TPU—thermoplastic polyurethane
UPR—unsaturated polyester resin

34


Table of Contents

ITEM 1A.    RISK FACTORS

Any of the following risks could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR BUSINESS

Our industry is affected by global economic factors including risks associated with volatile economic conditions.

        Our financial results are substantially dependent upon overall economic conditions in the United States, the European Union and Asia. Declining economic conditions in all or any of these locations—or negative perceptions about economic conditions—could result in a substantial decrease in demand for our products and could adversely affect our business. Uncertain economic conditions and market instability make it difficult for us, our customers and our suppliers to forecast demand trends. Renewed declines in demand would place additional pressure on our results of operations. The timing and extent of any changes to currently prevailing market conditions is uncertain and supply and demand may be unbalanced at any time. As a consequence, we are unable to accurately predict future economic conditions or the effect of such conditions on our financial condition or results of operations, and we can give no assurances as to the timing, extent or duration of the current or future economic cycles impacting the chemical industry.

Future acquisitions, partnerships and joint ventures may require significant resources and/or result in unanticipated adverse consequences that could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and/or financial condition.

        In the future we may seek to grow by making acquisitions or entering into partnerships and joint ventures. Any future acquisition, partnership or joint venture may require that we make a significant cash investment, issue stock or incur substantial debt. In addition, acquisitions, partnerships or investments may require significant managerial attention, which may be diverted from our other operations. These capital, equity and managerial commitments may impair the operation of our businesses. Any future acquisitions of businesses or facilities could entail a number of additional risks, including:

    the inability to maintain key pre-acquisition business relationships;

    increased operating costs;

    exposure to unanticipated liabilities;

    usage of limited investment and other baskets under our debt covenants;

    pre-existing or ongoing illegal activities conducted by the target company or joint venture partner; and

    difficulties in realizing projected efficiencies, synergies and cost savings.

        We have incurred indebtedness to finance past acquisitions. We may finance future acquisitions with additional indebtedness. We could face financial risks associated with incurring additional indebtedness, such as reducing our liquidity and access to financial markets and increasing the amount of cash flow required to service indebtedness, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

35


Table of Contents


Significant price volatility or interruptions in supply of our raw materials may result in increased costs that we may be unable to pass on to our customers, which could reduce our profitability.

        The prices of the raw materials that we purchase from third parties are cyclical and volatile. We purchase a substantial portion of these raw materials from third party suppliers. The cost of these raw materials represents a substantial portion of our operating expenses. The prices for a number of these raw materials generally follow price trends of, and vary with market conditions for, crude oil and natural gas feedstocks, which are highly volatile and cyclical.

        The feedstocks and other raw materials we consume are generally commodity products that are readily available at market prices. We frequently enter into supply agreements with particular suppliers, but disruptions of existing supply arrangements could substantially impact our profitability. If certain of our suppliers are unable to meet their obligations under present supply agreements, we may be forced to pay higher prices to obtain the necessary raw materials from other sources and we may not be able to increase prices for our finished products to recoup the higher raw materials costs. In addition, if any of the raw materials that we use become unavailable within the geographic area from which they are now sourced, then we may not be able to obtain suitable or cost effective substitutes. Any interruption in the supply of raw materials could increase our costs or decrease our revenues, which could reduce our cash flow.

        Our supply agreements typically provide for market-based pricing and provide us only limited protection against price volatility. While we attempt to match cost increases with corresponding product price increases, we are not always able to raise product prices immediately or at all. Timing differences between raw material prices, which may change daily, and contract product prices, which in many cases are negotiated only monthly or less often, have had and may continue to have a negative effect on our cash flow. Any cost increase that we are not able to pass on to our customers could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

Financial difficulties and related problems at our customers, vendors, suppliers and other business partners could have a material adverse effect on our business.

        The recent economic downturn has caused financial problems at some customers, vendors, suppliers and business partners. We rely on numerous vendors and suppliers and collaborations with other industry participants to provide us with chemicals, feedstocks and other raw materials, along with energy sources and, in certain cases, facilities, that we need to operate our business. If the economic downturn were to continue or worsen, some of these companies may be forced to reduce their output, shut down their operations or file for bankruptcy protection. If this were to occur, it could materially adversely affect their ability to provide us with the raw materials, energy sources or facilities that we need, which could disrupt our operations, including the production of certain of our products. In addition, it could be difficult to find replacements for certain of our business partners without incurring significant delays or cost increases.

        In addition, if the economic downturn were to continue or worsen, more of our customers may experience financial difficulties, including bankruptcies, restructurings and liquidations, which could affect our business by reducing sales, increasing our risk in extending trade credit to customers and reducing our profitability. A significant adverse change in a customer relationship or in a customer's financial position could cause us to limit or discontinue business with that customer, require us to assume more credit risk relating to that customer's receivables or limit our ability to collect accounts receivable from that customer, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

36


Table of Contents


Our available cash and access to additional capital may be limited by our significant leverage and the terms of our existing indebtedness, which could restrict our ability to grow our businesses.

        We have a significant amount of indebtedness outstanding. As of December 31, 2010, we had total consolidated outstanding indebtedness of approximately $4,146 million (including the current portion of long-term debt) and a debt to total capitalization ratio of approximately 69%. Our outstanding debt could have important consequences for our businesses, including the following:

    a high degree of debt makes us more vulnerable to a downturn in our businesses, our industry and the economy in general, as a significant percentage of our cash flow from operations will be required to make payments on our indebtedness, making it more difficult to react to changes in our business and in market or industry conditions;

    a substantial portion of our future cash flow from operations may be required to be dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on indebtedness, thereby reducing the funds available for other purposes, including the growth of our businesses;

    our ability to obtain additional financing may be constrained due to our existing level of debt, particularly in the current credit environment; and

    part of our indebtedness is, and any future debt may be, subject to variable interest rates, which makes us vulnerable to increases in interest rates.

        We require substantial capital to finance our operations and continued growth, and we may incur substantial additional debt from time to time for a variety of purposes, including acquiring additional businesses. However, our existing debt instruments contain restrictive covenants. Among other things, these covenants limit or prohibit our ability to incur more debt; make prepayments of other debt; pay dividends, redeem stock or make other distributions; issue capital stock; make investments; create liens; enter into transactions with affiliates; enter into sale and leaseback transactions; merge or consolidate; and transfer or sell assets.

        Our debt instruments also require us to comply with certain financial covenants under certain circumstances. For example, the leverage covenant (the "Leverage Covenant") applicable to our $300 million revolving facility (the "Revolving Facility") under our senior secured credit facilities (the "Senior Credit Facilities") requires us to maintain a maximum senior secured debt to EBITDA ratio of 3.75 to 1 when uncollateralized loans or letters of credit are outstanding under the Revolving Facility. As of December 31, 2010, we were in compliance with the covenant. However, if we violate this covenant, it could lead to an event of default under the Senior Credit Facilities, which could require us to pay off the balance of the Senior Credit Facilities in full and result in a loss of such facilities. It may not be possible for us to replace the Senior Credit Facilities with a substitute facility on terms acceptable to us, or at all.

        We also must comply with certain receivable performance metrics under our $250 million U.S. accounts receivable securitization program ("U.S. A/R Program") and our €225 million (approximately $297 million) European accounts receivable program ("EU A/R Program," and, collectively with the U.S. A/R Program, our "A/R Program" or "A/R Programs"). Failure to meet such metrics could lead to an early termination event and could require us to cease use of such facilities, prohibiting us from additional borrowings against our receivables, or, at the discretion of the lenders, requiring us to repay the A/R Programs in full. An early termination event under our A/R Programs would also constitute an event of default under our Senior Credit Facilities, which could require us to pay off the balance of the Senior Credit Facilities in full and result in a loss of such facilities. In summary, if debt under one or more of our facilities is accelerated, cross-default provisions in our debt instruments would likely be triggered, which would likely have a material adverse impact on our financial condition.

37


Table of Contents

        As of December 31, 2010, the current portion of our long term debt to affiliates totaled approximately $519 million. As of December 31, 2010, we had combined outstanding variable rate borrowings of approximately $2.3 billion. Assuming a 1% increase in interest rates, without giving effect to any interest rate hedges or our cash balances, our annual interest rate expense would increase by approximately $23 million. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash flow or are otherwise unable to obtain the funds required to meet payments of principal and interest on our indebtedness, or if we otherwise fail to comply with the various covenants in the instruments governing our indebtedness, we could be in default under the terms of those instruments. In the event of a default, a holder of the indebtedness could elect to declare all the funds borrowed under those instruments to be due and payable together with accrued and unpaid interest, the creditors under our Senior Credit Facilities could elect to terminate their commitments thereunder, and we or one or more of our subsidiaries could be forced into bankruptcy or liquidation. Any of the foregoing consequences could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

The industries in which we compete are highly competitive, and we may not be able to compete effectively with our competitors that have greater financial resources, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

        The industries in which we operate are highly competitive. Among our competitors are some of the world's largest chemical companies and major integrated petroleum companies that have their own raw material resources. Changes in the competitive landscape could make it difficult for us to retain our leadership position in various products and markets throughout the world. In addition, some of the companies with whom we compete may be able to produce products more economically than we can. Furthermore, some of our competitors have greater financial resources, which may enable them to invest significant capital into their businesses, including expenditures for research and development. While we are engaged in a range of research and development programs to develop new products and processes, to improve and refine existing products and processes, and to develop new applications for existing products, the failure to develop new products, processes or applications could make us less competitive. Moreover, if any of our current or future competitors develops proprietary technology that enables them to produce products at a significantly lower cost, our technology could be rendered uneconomical or obsolete.

        In addition, certain of our businesses use technology that is widely available. Accordingly, barriers to entry, apart from capital availability, may be low in certain product segments of our business, and the entrance of new competitors into the industry may reduce our ability to capture improving profit margins in circumstances where capacity utilization in the industry is increasing. Further, petroleum-rich countries have become more significant participants in the petrochemical industry and may expand this role significantly in the future. Increased competition in any of our businesses could compel us to reduce the prices of our products, which could result in reduced profit margins and loss of market share and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

Our results of operations may be adversely affected by international business risks, including fluctuations in currency exchange rates, legal restrictions and taxes.

        We conduct a majority of our business operations outside the U.S., and these operations are subject to risks normally associated with international operations. These risks include the need to convert currencies that may be received for our products into currencies in which we purchase raw materials or pay for services, which could result in a gain or loss depending on fluctuations in exchange rates. In addition, we translate our local currency financial results into U.S. dollars based on average exchange rates prevailing during the reporting period or the exchange rate at the end of that period. During times of a strengthening U.S. dollar, our reported international sales and earnings may be

38


Table of Contents


reduced because the local currency may translate into fewer U.S. dollars. Because we currently have significant operations located outside the U.S., we are exposed to fluctuations in global currency rates which may result in gains or losses on our financial statements.

        Other risks of international operations include trade barriers, tariffs, exchange controls, national and regional labor strikes, social and political risks, general economic risks and required compliance with a variety of U.S. and foreign laws, including tax laws and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. In addition, although we maintain an anti-corruption compliance program throughout the Company, violations of our compliance program may result in criminal or civil sanctions, including material monetary fines, penalties and other costs against us or our employees, and may have a material adverse effect on our business. Furthermore, in foreign jurisdictions where process of law may vary from country to country, we may experience difficulty in enforcing agreements. In jurisdictions where bankruptcy laws and practices may vary, we may experience difficulty collecting foreign receivables through foreign legal systems. The occurrence of these risks, among others, could disrupt the businesses of our international subsidiaries, which could significantly affect their ability to make distributions to us.

        We operate in a significant number of jurisdictions, which contributes to the volatility of our effective tax rate. Changes in tax laws or the interpretation of tax laws in the jurisdictions in which we operate may affect our effective tax rate. In addition, generally accepted accounting principles in the U.S. ("GAAP" or "U.S. GAAP") has required us to place valuation allowances against our net operating losses and other deferred tax assets in a number of tax jurisdictions. These valuation allowances primarily result from analysis of positive and negative evidence supporting the realization of tax benefits. Negative evidence includes a cumulative history of pre-tax operating losses in those specific tax jurisdictions. Valuation allowances have resulted in material fluctuations in our effective tax rate. Economic conditions may dictate the continued imposition of the current valuation allowances and potentially the establishment of new valuation allowances. While significant valuation allowances remain, our effective tax rate will likely continue to experience significant fluctuations.

Demand for many of our products is cyclical, and we may experience depressed market conditions for such products.

        Historically, the markets for many of our products have experienced alternating periods of tight supply, causing prices and profit margins to increase, followed by periods of capacity additions, resulting in oversupply and declining prices and profit margins. The volatility these markets experience occurs as a result of changes in the supply and demand for products, changes in energy prices and changes in various other economic conditions around the world. This cyclicality and volatility of our industry results in significant fluctuations in profits and cash flow from period to period and over the business cycle.

Natural or other disasters could disrupt our business and result in loss of revenue or in higher expenses.

        Any serious disruption at any of our facilities due to hurricane, fire, earthquake, flood, terrorist attack or any other natural or man-made disaster could impair our ability to use our facilities and have a material adverse impact on our revenues and increase our costs and expenses. If there is a natural disaster or other serious disruption at any of these facilities, it could impair our ability to adequately supply our customers and negatively impact our operating results. In addition, many of our current and potential customers are concentrated in specific geographic areas. A disaster in one of these regions could have a material adverse impact on our operations, operating results and financial condition.

        While we maintain business recovery plans that are intended to allow us to recover from natural disasters or other events that could disrupt our business, we cannot provide assurances that our plans would fully protect us from all such disasters or events that might result due to climate change. In addition, insurance may not adequately compensate us from any losses incurred as a result of natural

39


Table of Contents


or other disasters. Furthermore, in areas prone to frequent natural or other disasters, insurance may become increasingly expensive or not at all available.

Our operations involve risks that may increase our operating costs, which could reduce our profitability.

        Although we take precautions to enhance the safety of our operations and minimize the risk of disruptions, our operations are subject to hazards inherent in the manufacturing and marketing of chemical products. These hazards include: chemical spills, pipeline leaks and ruptures, storage tank leaks, discharges or releases of toxic or hazardous substances or gases and other hazards incident to the manufacturing, processing, handling, transportation and storage of dangerous chemicals. We are also potentially subject to other hazards, including natural disasters and severe weather; explosions and fires; transportation problems, including interruptions, spills and leaks; mechanical failures; unscheduled downtimes; labor difficulties; remediation complications; and other risks. Many potential hazards can cause bodily injury and loss of life, severe damage to or destruction of property and equipment and environmental damage, and may result in suspension of operations and the imposition of civil or criminal penalties and liabilities. Furthermore, we are subject to present and future claims with respect to workplace exposure, exposure of contractors on our premises as well as other persons located nearby, workers' compensation and other matters.

        We maintain property, business interruption and casualty insurance policies which we believe are in accordance with customary industry practices, but we are not fully insured against all potential hazards and risks incident to our business. We maintain property damage and business interruption insurance policies and products liability insurance policies, as well as insurance policies covering other types of risks, including pollution legal liability insurance. Each of these insurance policies is subject to customary exclusions, deductibles and coverage limits, in accordance with industry standards and practices. As a result of market conditions, premiums and deductibles for certain insurance policies can increase substantially and, in some instances, certain insurance may become unavailable or available only for reduced amounts of coverage. If we were to incur a significant liability for which we were not fully insured, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

        In addition, we are subject to various claims and litigation in the ordinary course of business. We are a party to various pending lawsuits and proceedings. It is possible that judgments could be rendered against us in these cases or others in which we could be uninsured or not covered by indemnity and beyond the amounts that we currently have reserved or anticipate incurring for such matters.

We might not be able to obtain funding if deterioration in the credit and capital markets were to occur. This could hinder or prevent us from meeting our future capital needs and from refinancing our existing indebtedness when it comes due.

        While global financial markets and economic conditions have improved, they continue to be volatile. A deterioration of capital and credit markets could hinder our ability to access these markets. If this were to occur, we cannot be certain that additional funding for our capital needs from credit and capital markets would be available if needed and, to the extent required, on acceptable terms. In addition, we might be unable to refinance our existing indebtedness when it comes due on terms that are acceptable to us or at all. If we were unable to meet our capital needs or refinance our existing indebtedness, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial position and results of operations.

40


Table of Contents

A downgrade in the ratings of the securities of our company or our subsidiaries could result in increased interest and other financial expenses related to future borrowings of our company or our subsidiaries and could restrict our access to additional capital or trade credit.

        Standard and Poor's Ratings Services and Moody's Investors Service maintain credit ratings for our company. Each of these ratings is currently below investment grade. Any decision by these or other ratings agencies, which may in the future rate our debt, to downgrade such ratings in the future could result in increased interest and other financial expenses relating to our future borrowings and could restrict our ability to obtain additional financing on satisfactory terms. In addition, any downgrade could restrict our access to, and negatively impact the terms of, trade credit extended by our suppliers of raw materials.

We are subject to many EHS regulations that may result in unanticipated costs or liabilities, which could reduce our profitability.

        We are subject to extensive federal, state, local and foreign laws, regulations, rules and ordinances relating to pollution, protection of the environment and human health, and the generation, storage, handling, transportation, treatment, disposal and remediation of hazardous substances and waste materials. Actual or alleged violations of EHS laws or permit requirements could result in restrictions or prohibitions on plant operations, substantial civil or criminal sanctions, as well as, under some EHS laws, the assessment of strict liability and/or joint and several liability.

        Increasing concerns regarding the safety of chemicals in commerce and their potential impact on the environment constitute a growing trend. Governmental, regulatory and societal demands for increasing levels of product safety and environmental protection could result in increased pressure for more stringent regulatory control with respect to the chemical industry. In addition, these concerns could influence public perceptions, the viability of certain products, our reputation, the cost to comply with regulations, and the ability to attract and retain employees. Moreover, changes in EHS regulations could inhibit or interrupt our operations, or require us to modify our facilities or operations. Accordingly, environmental or regulatory matters may cause us to incur significant unanticipated losses, costs or liabilities, which could reduce our profitability.

        We could incur significant expenditures in order to comply with existing or future EHS laws. Capital expenditures and costs relating to EHS matters will be subject to evolving regulatory requirements and will depend on the timing of the promulgation and enforcement of specific standards which impose requirements on our operations. Capital expenditures and costs beyond those currently anticipated may therefore be required under existing or future EHS laws.

        Furthermore, we may be liable for the costs of investigating and cleaning up environmental contamination on or from our properties or at off-site locations where we disposed of or arranged for the disposal or treatment of hazardous materials or from disposal activities that pre-dated our purchase of our businesses. We may therefore incur additional costs and expenditures beyond those currently anticipated to address all such known and unknown situations under existing and future EHS laws.

Existing or future litigation or legislative initiatives restricting the use of MTBE in gasoline may subject us or our products to environmental liability, materially reduce our sales and/or materially increase our costs.

        We produce MTBE, an oxygenate that is blended with gasoline to reduce vehicle air emissions and to enhance the octane rating of gasoline. Litigation or legislative initiatives restricting the use of MTBE in gasoline may subject us or our products to environmental liability or materially adversely affect our sales and costs. Because MTBE has contaminated some water supplies, its use has become controversial in the U.S. and elsewhere, and its use has been effectively eliminated in the U.S. market. We currently market MTBE, either directly or through third parties, to gasoline additive customers located outside the U.S., although there are additional costs associated with such outside-U.S. sales

41


Table of Contents


which may result in decreased profitability compared to historical sales in the U.S. We may also elect to use all or a portion of our precursor TBA to produce saleable products other than MTBE. If we opt to produce products other than MTBE, necessary modifications to our facilities will require significant capital expenditures and the sale of such other products may produce a lower level of cash flow than that historically produced from the sale of MTBE.

        Numerous companies, including refiners, manufacturers and sellers of gasoline, as well as manufacturers of MTBE, have been named as defendants in numerous cases in U.S. courts that allege MTBE contamination in groundwater. The plaintiffs in the MTBE groundwater contamination cases generally seek compensatory damages, punitive damages, injunctive relief, such as monitoring and abatement, and attorney fees. Between 2007 and 2009, we were named as a defendant in 18 of these lawsuits in New York state and federal courts, which we settled in an amount immaterial to us. It is possible that we could be named as a defendant in future MTBE contamination cases. We cannot provide assurances that adverse results against us in future MTBE contamination cases will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial position.

Failure to adequately protect critical data and technology systems could materially affect our operations.

        Information technology system failures, network disruptions and breaches of data security could disrupt our operations by causing delays or cancellation of customer orders, impeding the manufacture or shipment of products, processing transactions and reporting financial results, resulting in the unintentional disclosure of customer or our information, or damage to our reputation. While management has taken steps to address these concerns by implementing network security and internal control measures, there can be no assurance that a system failure or data security breach will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and operating results.

Our business is dependent on our intellectual property. If our intellectual property rights cannot be enforced or our trade secrets become known to our competitors, our ability to compete may be adversely affected.

        Proprietary protection of our processes, apparatuses and other technology is important to our business. While a presumption of validity exists with respect to patents issued to us in the U.S., there can be no assurance that any of our patents will not be challenged, invalidated, circumvented or rendered unenforceable. Furthermore, if any pending patent application filed by us does not result in an issued patent, or if patents are issued to us, but such patents do not provide meaningful protection of our intellectual property, then our ability to compete may be adversely affected. Additionally, our competitors or other third parties may obtain patents that restrict or preclude our ability to lawfully produce or sell our products in a competitive manner, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

        We also rely upon unpatented proprietary know-how and continuing technological innovation and other trade secrets to develop and maintain our competitive position. While it is our policy to enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees and third parties to protect our intellectual property, these confidentiality agreements may be breached, may not provide meaningful protection for our trade secrets or proprietary know-how, or adequate remedies may not be available in the event of an unauthorized access, use or disclosure of our trade secrets and know-how. In addition, others could obtain knowledge of our trade secrets through independent development or other access by legal means.

        Consequently, we may have to rely on judicial enforcement of our patents and other proprietary rights. We may not be able to effectively protect our intellectual property rights from misappropriation or infringement in countries where effective patent, trademark, trade secret and other intellectual property laws and judicial systems may be unavailable, or may not protect our proprietary rights to the same extent as U.S. law.

42


Table of Contents

        The failure of our patents or confidentiality agreements to protect our processes, apparatuses, technology, trade secrets or proprietary know-how or the failure of adequate legal remedies for related actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

Loss of key members of our management could disrupt our business.

        We depend on the continued employment and performance of our senior executives and other key members of management. If any of these individuals resigns or becomes unable to continue in his or her present role and is not adequately replaced, our business operations and our ability to implement our growth strategies could be materially disrupted. We generally do not have employment agreements with, and we do not maintain any "key person" life insurance for, any of our executive officers.

Conflicts, military actions, terrorist attacks and general instability throughout the world, and in particular in certain energy-producing nations, along with increased security regulations related to our industry, could adversely affect our business.

        In the past, conflicts, military actions and terrorist attacks have precipitated global economic instability and turmoil in world financial markets. Current regional tensions and conflicts in energy-producing nations, including continuing instability in Iran, ongoing military action in Iraq, and other conflicts have caused, and may cause further, increases in raw material costs, particularly natural gas and crude oil based feedstocks, which are used in our operations. The uncertainty surrounding the threat of further armed hostilities, military action or acts of terrorism may impact any or all of our physical facilities and operations, which are located in North America, Europe, Australia, Asia, Africa, South America and the Middle East, or those of our suppliers or customers. Furthermore, the resulting economic disruption caused by such events may result in reduced demand from our customers for our products.

        A military action or terrorist attack that impacts any of our facilities, or the facilities of our suppliers or customers, could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, a number of governments have begun regulatory processes that could lead to new regulations impacting the security of chemical plant locations and the transportation of hazardous chemicals, which could result in higher operating costs. Conflicts and stability will subject our worldwide operations to increased risks and, depending on their magnitude, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and liquidity.

If our subsidiaries do not make sufficient distributions to us, then we will not be able to make payment on our debts.

        Our debt is generally the exclusive obligation of Huntsman International and our guarantor subsidiaries. Because a significant portion of our operations are conducted by non-guarantor subsidiaries, our cash flow and our ability to service indebtedness, including our ability to pay the interest on our debt when due and principal of such debt at maturity, are dependent to a large extent upon cash dividends and distributions or other transfers from such non-guarantor subsidiaries. Any payment of dividends, distributions, loans or advances by our non-guarantor subsidiaries to us could be subject to restrictions on dividends or repatriation of earnings under applicable local law, monetary transfer restrictions and foreign currency exchange regulations in the jurisdictions in which our subsidiaries operate, and any restrictions imposed by the current and future debt instruments of our non-guarantor subsidiaries. In addition, payments to us by our subsidiaries are contingent upon our subsidiaries' earnings.

        Our subsidiaries are separate and distinct legal entities and, except for our guarantor subsidiaries, have no obligation, contingent or otherwise, to pay any amounts due on our debt or to make any funds

43


Table of Contents


available for those amounts, whether by dividends, loans, distributions or other payments, and do not guarantee the payment of interest on, or principal of, our debt. Any right that we have to receive any assets of any of our subsidiaries that are not guarantors upon the liquidation or reorganization of any such subsidiary, and the consequent right of holders of notes to realize proceeds from the sale of their assets, will be structurally subordinated to the claims of that subsidiary's creditors, including trade creditors and holders of debt issued by that subsidiary.

Regulatory requirements to reduce GHG emissions could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

        Although the continued existence of binding emissions limitations under international treaties such as the Kyoto Protocol is in doubt after 2012, we expect some of our operations to be subject to regulatory requirements to reduce GHG emissions. Even in the absence of a new global agreement to limit GHGs, we may be subject to additional regulation under the European Union Emissions Trading System as well as new national and regional GHG trading programs. For example, our operations in Australia and selected U.S. states may be subject to future GHG regulations under emissions trading systems in those jurisdictions.

        Because the United States has not adopted federal climate change legislation, domestic GHG efforts are likely to be guided by EPA and state agency regulations in the near future. While EPA's GHG programs are currently subject to judicial challenge, our domestic operations may become subject to EPA's regulatory requirements when implemented. In particular, expansions of our existing facilities or construction of new facilities may be subject to the Clean Air Act's Prevention of Significant Deterioration Requirements under EPA's GHG "Tailoring Rule". In addition, certain aspects of our operations may be subject to GHG emissions monitoring and reporting requirements. If we are subject to EPA GHG regulations, we may face increased monitoring, reporting, and compliance costs.

        We are already managing and reporting GHG emissions, to varying degrees, as required by law for our sites in locations subject to Kyoto Protocol obligations and/or EU emissions trading scheme requirements. Although these sites are subject to existing GHG legislation, few have experienced or anticipate significant cost increases as a result of these programs, although it is possible that GHG emission restrictions may increase over time. Potential consequences of such restrictions include capital costs to modify assets as necessary to meet GHG emission limits and/or increases in energy costs above the level of general inflation, as well as direct compliance costs. Currently, however, it is not possible to estimate the likely financial impact of potential future regulation on any of our sites.

        Finally, it should be noted that some scientists have concluded that increasing concentrations of GHGs in the Earth's atmosphere may produce climate changes that have significant physical effects, such as increased frequency and severity of storms, droughts, floods and other climatic events. If any of those effects were to occur, they could have an adverse effect on our assets and operations.

RISKS RELATED TO OUR COMMON STOCK AND DEBT SECURITIES

Our stock price has been and may continue to be subject to large fluctuations.

        We have experienced significant fluctuations in our stock price and share trading volume in the past and may continue to do so. The trading price of our common stock has been and may continue to be subject to wide fluctuations in response to a variety of issues, including broad market factors that may have a material adverse impact on our stock price, regardless of actual performance. The following factors could affect our stock price:

    periodic variations in the actual or anticipated financial results of our business or that of our competitors;

    downward revisions in securities analysts' estimates of our future operating results or of the future operating results of our competitors;

44


Table of Contents

    material announcements by us or our competitors;

    public sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock; and

    adverse changes in general market conditions or economic trends or in conditions or trends in the markets in which we operate.

Shares available for future sale may cause our common stock price to decline, which may negatively impact the trading price of our common stock.

        Sales of substantial numbers of additional shares of our common stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, may cause prevailing market prices for shares of our common stock to decline.

We have the ability to issue additional equity securities, which would lead to further dilution of our issued and outstanding common stock.

        The issuance of additional equity securities would result in dilution of then-existing stockholders' equity interests in us. Our certificate of incorporation authorizes our Board of Directors, without stockholder approval, to establish one or more series of preferred stock and to determine, with respect to any series of preferred stock, the number of shares in that series and the terms, rights and limitations of that series. If we issue convertible notes or convertible preferred stock, a subsequent conversion may dilute the current common stockholders' interest. Our Board of Directors has no present intention of issuing any such convertible instruments, but reserves the right to do so in the future. In addition, we may issue additional shares of common stock under our equity incentive plans.

Certain provisions contained in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws could discourage a takeover attempt, which may reduce or eliminate the likelihood of a change of control transaction and, therefore, limit your ability to sell our common stock at a price higher than the current market value.

        Certain provisions contained in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws, such as a classified Board of Directors, limitations on stockholder proposals at meetings of stockholders and the inability of stockholders to call special meetings and certain provisions of Delaware law, could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of our Company, even if some of our stockholders considered such a change of control to be beneficial. Our certificate of incorporation also authorizes our Board of Directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval. Therefore, our Board of Directors could elect to issue preferred stock that has special voting or other rights that could make it even more difficult for a third party to acquire us, which may reduce or eliminate your ability to sell our common stock at a price higher than the current market value.

The declaration of dividends by our Company is subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors and limitations under Delaware law, and there can be no assurance that we will continue to pay dividends.

        Over the past four years we have paid quarterly dividends on our common stock. The declaration of dividends by our Company is subject to the discretion of our Board of Directors. Our Board of Directors takes into account such matters as general business conditions, our financial results, expected liquidity and capital expenditure requirements, contractual, legal or regulatory restrictions on the payment of dividends, the effect on our debt ratings and such other factors as our Board of Directors may deem relevant, and we can provide no assurance that we will continue to pay dividends on our common stock. In addition, Delaware law contains certain restrictions on a company's ability to pay cash dividends and we can provide no assurance that those restrictions will not prevent us from paying a dividend in future periods.

45


Table of Contents


Jon M. Huntsman, through direct and indirect ownership of our common stock, may be deemed to control approximately 18% of our outstanding common stock, and he may have the ability to substantially impact the outcome of matters voted on by our stockholders.

        Jon M. Huntsman, through direct and indirect ownership of our common stock, may be deemed to control approximately 18% of our outstanding common stock. Through his interests, he may have the ability to substantially impact:

    the election of the members of the Board of Directors of our Company;

    the outcome of matters submitted to our stockholders for approval, including amendments to our certificate of incorporation, mergers, consolidations and the sale of all or substantially all of our assets; and

    any potential change in control of our Company.

We may purchase a portion of our debt securities.

        We may from time to time seek to repurchase or redeem a portion of our debt securities in open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions, tender offers or otherwise. Any such repurchases or redemptions and the timing and amount thereof would depend on prevailing market conditions, liquidity requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors. Such transactions could impact the market for our debt securities and negatively affect our liquidity.

ITEM 1B.    UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

        As of December 31, 2010, we did not have any unresolved comments from the staff of the SEC.

ITEM 2.    PROPERTIES

        We own or lease chemical manufacturing and research facilities in the locations indicated in the list below which we believe are adequate for our short-term and anticipated long-term needs. We own or lease office space and storage facilities throughout the U.S. and in many foreign countries. Our principal executive offices are located at 500 Huntsman Way, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108. The following is a list of our material owned or leased properties where manufacturing, research and main office facilities are located.

Location
  Business Segment   Description of Facility

Salt Lake City, Utah(1)

  Corporate and other   Executive Offices

The Woodlands, Texas(1)

  Various   Operating Headquarters, Global Technology Center

Geismar, Louisiana(2)

  Polyurethanes and Performance Products   MDI, Nitrobenzene(4), Aniline(4), Polyols and Maleic Anhydride Manufacturing Facilities and Polyurethanes Systems House

Rozenburg, The Netherlands(1)

  Polyurethanes   MDI Manufacturing Facility, Polyols Manufacturing Facilities and Polyurethanes Systems House

Caojing, China

  Polyurethanes   MDI Finishing Facilities, Global Technology Center

Caojing, China(3)

  Polyurethanes   Precursor MDI Manufacturing Facility

Deerpark, Australia

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Cartagena, Colombia

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Deggendorf, Germany

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Ternate, Italy

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

46


Table of Contents

Location
  Business Segment   Description of Facility

Shanghai, China(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House, Global Technology Center

Thane (Maharashtra), India(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Buenos Aires, Argentina(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Samuprakam, Thailand(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Kuan Yin, Taiwan(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Tlalnepantla, Mexico

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Mississauga, Ontario(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Obninsk, Russia(4)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethanes Systems House

Dammam, Saudi Arabia(5)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Systems House

Auburn Hills, Michigan(1)

  Polyurethanes   Polyurethane Research Facility

Everberg, Belgium

  Polyurethanes and Performance Products   Polyurethane and Performance Products Regional Headquarters, Global Technology Center

Derry, New Hampshire(1)

  Polyurethanes   TPU Research Facility

Ringwood, Illinois(1)

  Polyurethanes   TPU Manufacturing Facility

Osnabrück, Germany

  Polyurethanes   TPU Manufacturing Facility/ Polyurethane Systems House

Wilton, U.K. 

  Polyurethanes   Aniline and Nitrobenzene Manufacturing Facilities

Port Neches, Texas

  Polyurethanes and Performance Products   Olefins, EO, EG, Surfactants, Amines and PO Manufacturing Facilities

Conroe, Texas

  Performance Products   Amines Manufacturing Facility

Petfurdo, Hungary(1)

  Performance Products   Amines Manufacturing Facility

Llanelli, U.K. 

  Performance Products   Amines Manufacturing Facility

Freeport, Texas(1)

  Performance Products   Amines Manufacturing Facility

Jurong Island, Singapore(1)

  Performance Products   Amines Manufacturing Facility

Jubail, Saudi Arabia(6)

  Performance Products   Amines Manufacturing Facility

Chocolate Bayou, Texas(1)

  Performance Products   LAB Manufacturing Facility

Pensacola, Florida(1)

  Performance Products   Maleic Anhydride Manufacturing Facility

Moers, Germany(7)

  Performance Products   Maleic Anhydride Manufacturing Facility

Dayton, Texas

  Performance Products   Surfactant Manufacturing Facility

Botany, Australia

  Performance Products   Surfactant/EG Manufacturing Facility

St. Mihiel, France

  Performance Products   Surfactant Manufacturing Facility

Lavera, France(1)

  Performance Products   Surfactant Manufacturing Facility

Castiglione, Italy

  Performance Products   Surfactant Manufacturing Facility

Patrica/Frosinone, Italy

  Performance Products   Surfactant Manufacturing Facility

Barcelona, Spain(1)

  Performance Products   Surfactant Manufacturing Facility

Melbourne, Australia

  Performance Products   Research Facility

Bergkamen, Germany

  Advanced Materials   Synthesis Facility

Monthey, Switzerland

  Advanced Materials   Resins and Synthesis Facility

Pamplona, Spain

  Advanced Materials   Resins and Synthesis Facility

McIntosh, Alabama

  Advanced Materials   Resins and Synthesis Facility

Chennai, India(8)

  Advanced Materials   Resins and Synthesis Facility

Bad Saeckingen, Germany(1)

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

Duxford, U.K. 

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

Sadat City, Egypt

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

Taboão da Serra, Brazil

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

Panyu, China(1)(9)

  Advanced Materials   Formulating and Synthesis Facility and Technology Center

East Lansing, Michigan

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

47


Table of Contents

Location
  Business Segment   Description of Facility

Istanbul, Turkey(1)

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

Los Angeles, California

  Advanced Materials   Formulating Facility

Basel, Switzerland(1)

  Advanced Materials and Textile Effects   Technology Center, Advanced Materials headquarters and Textile Effects Textile Dyes Facility

Panyu, China(1)(9)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Synthesis Facility and Technology Center

Langweid am Leich, Germany(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Synthesis Facility

Charlotte, North Carolina(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Formulations Facility

Samutsakorn (Mahachai), Thailand(1)

  Textile Effects   Textiles Dyes and Chemicals Formulations Facility

Atotonilquillo, Mexico

  Textile Effects   Textile Dyes and Chemicals Formulations Facility

High Point, North Carolina(1)

  Textile Effects   Technology Center

Baroda, India

  Textile Effects   Textile Dyes and Chemicals Synthesis Facility

Gandaria, Indonesia

  Textile Effects   Textile Dyes and Chemicals Formulations Facility

Qingdao, China

  Textile Effects   Textile Dyes Facility

Fraijanes, Guatemala(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Formulations Facility

Bogota, Colombia(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Formulations Facility

Hangzhou, China(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Formulations Facility

Istanbul, Turkey(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Formulations Facility

Karachi, Pakistan(1)

  Textile Effects   Chemicals Formulations Facility

Gateway West, Singapore(1)

  Textile Effects and Performance Products   Textile Effects Headquarters and Performance Products Regional Headquarters

Greatham, U.K. 

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

Calais, France

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

Huelva, Spain

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

Scarlino, Italy

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

Teluk Kalung, Malaysia

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

Umbogintwini, South Africa

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

Lake Charles, Louisiana(10)

  Pigments   Titanium Dioxide Manufacturing Facility

(1)
Leased land and/or building.

(2)
The Geismar facility is owned as follows: we own 100% of the MDI, polyol and maleic anhydride facilities, and Rubicon LLC, a consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Chemtura Corporation in which we own a 50% interest, owns the aniline and nitrobenzene facilities. Rubicon LLC is a separate legal entity that operates both the assets that we own jointly with Chemtura Corporation and our wholly-owned assets at Geismar.

(3)
35% interest in SLIC, our unconsolidated manufacturing joint venture with BASF AG and three Chinese chemical companies.

(4)
45%-owned unconsolidated manufacturing joint venture with NMG.

(5)
51%-owned consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Basic Chemicals Industries Ltd.

(6)
50% interest in Arabian Amines Company, our consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Zamil Group.

(7)
50% interest in Sasol-Huntsman, our unconsolidated manufacturing joint venture with Sasol.

(8)
76%-owned consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Tamilnadu Petroproducts Limited.

(9)
95%-owned consolidated manufacturing joint venture with Guangdong Panyu Shilou Town Economic Development Co. Ltd.

(10)
Owned by Louisiana Pigment Company, L.P., our unconsolidated manufacturing joint venture which is owned 50% by us and 50% by Kronos Worldwide.

48


Table of Contents

ITEM 3.    LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

Environmental Enforcement Proceedings

        On occasion, we receive notices of violation, enforcement or other complaints from regulatory agencies alleging non-compliance with applicable EHS laws. Based on currently available information and our past experience, we do not believe that the resolution of any pending or threatened environmental enforcement proceedings will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

        During the period from 2007 through 2009, our Performance Products business' surfactants manufacturing facility located in New South Wales, Australia experienced five reported releases of ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, both raw materials used in the surfactants manufacturing process. As a consequence of these releases, the site received and responded to information requests and physical inspections from WorkCover NSW and/or the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW, both regulatory agencies with oversight authority for the facility. Subsequent to these inquiries, by letter dated September 10, 2010, the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW notified us that it had commenced a court proceeding regarding the fifth ethylene oxide release which occurred on October 28, 2009. The authorities alleged a breach of a condition of our operating license, but have not alleged that a pollution event occurred. Although the facility submitted a good faith proposal to settle the matter, the agency elected instead to continue with the proceeding. Consequently, on December 3, 2010, we pled guilty to the one allegation of a breach of our operating license. A one-day sentencing hearing of the agreed-to facts and supporting evidence is set for March 22, 2011.

Asbestos Litigation

        We have been named as a "premises defendant" in a number of asbestos exposure cases, typically claims by non-employees of exposure to asbestos while at a facility. In the past, these cases typically have involved multiple plaintiffs bringing actions against multiple defendants, and the complaints have not indicated which plaintiffs were making claims against which defendants, where or how the alleged injuries occurred or what injuries each plaintiff claimed. These facts, which would be central to any estimate of probable loss, generally have been learned only through discovery.

        Where a claimant's alleged exposure occurred prior to our ownership of the relevant "premises," the prior owners generally have contractually agreed to retain liability for, and to indemnify us against, asbestos exposure claims. This indemnification is not subject to any time or dollar amount limitations. Upon service of a complaint in one of these cases, we tender it to the prior owner. None of the complaints in these cases state the amount of damages being sought. The prior owner accepts responsibility for the conduct of the defense of the cases and payment of any amounts due to the claimants. In our fourteen-year experience with tendering these cases, we have not made any payment with respect to any tendered asbestos cases. We believe that the prior owners have the intention and ability to continue to honor their indemnity obligations, although we cannot assure you that they will continue to do so or that we will not be liable for these cases if they do not.

49


Table of Contents

        The following table presents for the periods indicated certain information about cases for which service has been received that we have tendered to the prior owner, all of which have been accepted.

 
  Year ended
December 31,
2010
  Year ended
December 31,
2009
  Year ended
December 31,
2008
 

Unresolved at beginning of period

    1,138     1,140     1,192  

Tendered during period

    24     18     21  

Resolved during period(1)

    46     20     73  

Unresolved at end of period

    1,116     1,138     1,140  

      (1)
      Although the indemnifying party informs us when tendered cases have been resolved, it generally does not inform us of the settlement amounts relating to such cases, if any. The indemnifying party has informed us that it typically manages our defense together with the defense of other entities in such cases and resolves claims involving multiple defendants simultaneously, and that it considers the allocation of settlement amounts, if any, among defendants to be confidential and proprietary. Consequently, we are not able to provide the number of cases resolved with payment by the indemnifying party or the amount of such payments.

        We have never made any payments with respect to these cases. As of December 31, 2010, we had an accrued liability of $13 million relating to these cases and a corresponding receivable of $13 million relating to our indemnity protection with respect to these cases. We cannot assure you that our liability will not exceed our accruals or that our liability associated with these cases would not be material to our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity; accordingly, we are not able to estimate the amount or range of loss in excess of our accruals. Additional asbestos exposure claims may be made against us in the future, and such claims could be material. However, because we are not able to estimate the amount or range of losses associated with such claims, we have made no accruals with respect to unasserted asbestos exposure claims as of December 31, 2010.

        Certain cases in which we are a "premises defendant" are not subject to indemnification by prior owners or operators. The following table presents for the periods indicated certain information about these cases. Cases include all cases for which service has been received by us. Certain prior cases that were filed in error against us have been dismissed.

 
  Year ended
December 31,
2010
  Year ended
December 31,
2009
  Year ended
December 31,
2008
 

Unresolved at beginning of period

    39     43     39  

Filed during period

    5     3     8  

Resolved during period

    7     7     4  

Unresolved at end of period

    37     39     43  

        We paid gross settlement costs for asbestos exposure cases that are not subject to indemnification of $201,000 and nil during the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively. As of December 31, 2010, we had an accrual of $225,000 relating to these cases. We cannot assure you that our liability will not exceed our accruals or that our liability associated with these cases would not be material to our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity; accordingly, we are not able to estimate the amount or range of loss in excess of our accruals. Additional asbestos exposure claims may be made against us in the future, and such claims could be material. However, because we are not able to estimate the amount or range of losses associated with such claims, we have made no accruals with respect to unasserted asbestos exposure claims as of December 31, 2010.

50


Table of Contents

Antitrust Matters

        We have been named as a defendant in civil class action antitrust suits alleging that between 1999 and 2004 we conspired with Bayer, BASF, Dow and Lyondell to fix the prices of MDI, TDI, polyether polyols, and related systems ("polyether polyol products") sold in the U.S. in violation of the federal Sherman Act. These cases are consolidated as the "Polyether Polyols" cases in multidistrict litigation known as In re Urethane Antitrust Litigation, MDL No. 1616, Civil No. 2:04-md-01616-JWL-DJW, pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of Kansas.

        In addition, we and the other Polyether Polyol defendants have also been named as defendants in three civil antitrust suits brought by certain direct purchasers of polyether polyol products that opted out of the class certified in MDL No. 1616. While these opt out plaintiffs make similar claims as the class plaintiffs, the court denied defendants' motion to dismiss claims of improper activity outside the class period. Accordingly, the relevant time frame for these cases is 1994-2006. These cases are referred to as the "direct action cases" and are pending in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.

        Merits discovery was consolidated in MDL No. 1616 for both the class and direct action cases and is ongoing. The trial is currently scheduled for May 2012.

        Two purported class action cases filed May 5 and 17, 2006 pending in the Superior Court of Justice, Ontario Canada and Superior Court, Province of Quebec, District of Quebec, by direct purchasers of MDI, TDI and polyether polyols and by indirect purchasers of these products remain largely dormant although the plaintiff in one case recently filed papers seeking class certification. A purported class action case filed February 15, 2002 by purchasers of products containing rubber and urethanes products and pending in Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco is stayed pending resolution of MDL No. 1616. Finally, we have been named in a proposed third amended complaint by indirect purchasers of MDI, TDI, polyether polyols and polyester polyols pending against Bayer and Chemtura in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. The matter is currently stayed pending a settlement of previously asserted claims against Bayer and Chemtura. We opposed the motion for leave to file the proposed amended complaint adding us as a defendant in that action. The plaintiffs in each of these matters make similar claims against the defendants as the class plaintiffs in MDL No. 1616.

        We have been named as a defendant in two purported class action civil antitrust suits alleging that we and our co-defendants and other co-conspirators conspired to fix prices of titanium dioxide sold in the U.S. between at least March 1, 2002 and the present. The cases were filed on February 9 and 12, 2010 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland and a consolidated complaint was filed on April 12, 2010. The other defendants named in this matter are E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Kronos Worldwide Inc., Millennium Inorganic Chemicals, Inc. and the National Titanium Dioxide Company Limited (d/b/a Cristal). Together with our co-defendants we have filed a motion to dismiss this litigation.

        In all of the antitrust litigation currently pending against us, the plaintiffs generally are seeking injunctive relief, treble damages, costs of suit and attorneys fees. The plaintiffs' pleadings in these various antitrust suits provide few specifics about any alleged illegal conduct on our part, and we are not aware of any illegal conduct by us or any of our employees. Nevertheless, we have incurred costs related to these claims and could incur additional costs in amounts material to us.

Port Arthur Plant Fire Insurance Litigation Settlement

        On April 29, 2006, our former Port Arthur, Texas olefins manufacturing plant (which we sold to Flint Hills Resources in November 2007) experienced a major fire. The plant was covered by property damage and business interruption insurance through International Risk Insurance Company ("IRIC"),

51


Table of Contents


our captive insurer, and certain reinsurers (the "Reinsurers"). The property damage and business interruption insurance was subject to a combined deductible of $60 million. We, together with IRIC, asserted claims to the Reinsurers related to losses occurring as a result of this fire. On August 31, 2007, the Reinsurers brought an action against us in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. The action sought to compel us to arbitrate with the Reinsurers to resolve disputes related to our claims or, in the alternative, to declare judgment in favor of the Reinsurers. Pursuant to a December 29, 2008 agreement, we participated with the Reinsurers in binding arbitration. We paid our deductible on the claim of $60 million and were paid $365 million by the Reinsurers prior to the commencement of binding arbitration. On May 14, 2010, we entered into a settlement agreement with the Reinsurers, including those Reinsurers that did not participate in the arbitration proceedings that resolved the remainder of our insurance claim for a total amount of $110 million. The Reinsurers completed the payment of this amount on June 15, 2010. For more information, see "Note 25. Casualty Losses and Insurance Recoveries—Port Arthur, Texas Plant Fire" too our consolidated financial statements.

Other Proceedings

        We are a party to various other proceedings instituted by private plaintiffs, governmental authorities and others arising under provisions of applicable laws, including various environmental, products liability and other laws. Except as otherwise disclosed in this report, we do not believe that the outcome of any of these matters will have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

ITEM 4.    (REMOVED AND RESERVED)

EXECUTIVE OFFICERS OF THE REGISTRANT

        The following is information concerning our executive officers and significant employees as of the date of this report.

        Jon M. Huntsman, age 73, is the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors of our Company. Prior to appointment as Executive Chairman effective February 2009, Mr. Huntsman served as Chairman of the Board of Directors of our Company, a position he had held since our Company was formed. Mr. Huntsman also serves on our Litigation Committee. He has been Chairman of the Board of all Huntsman companies since he founded his first plastics company in 1970. Mr. Huntsman served as Chief Executive Officer of our Company and our affiliated companies from 1970 to 2000. Mr. Huntsman is a director or manager, as applicable, of Huntsman International and certain of our other subsidiaries. In addition, Mr. Huntsman serves or has served as Chairman or as a member of numerous corporate, philanthropic and industry boards, including the American Red Cross, The Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Primary Children's Medical Center Foundation, the Chemical Manufacturers Association and the American Plastics Council. Mr. Huntsman was selected in 1994 as the chemical industry's top CEO for all businesses in Europe and North America. Mr. Huntsman formerly served as Special Assistant to the President of the United States and as Vice Chairman of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. He is the Chairman and Founder of the Huntsman Cancer Institute.

        Peter R. Huntsman, age 47, is President, Chief Executive Officer and a Director of our Company. Mr. Huntsman also serves on our Litigation Committee. Prior to his appointment in July 2000 as Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Huntsman had served as President and Chief Operating Officer since 1994. In 1987, Mr. Huntsman joined Huntsman Polypropylene Corporation as Vice President before serving as Senior Vice President and General Manager. Mr. Huntsman has also served as President of Olympus Oil, as Senior Vice President of Huntsman Chemical Corporation and as a Senior Vice President of

52


Table of Contents


Huntsman Packaging Corporation, a former subsidiary of our Company. Mr. Huntsman is a director or manager, as applicable, of Huntsman International and certain of our other subsidiaries.

        J. Kimo Esplin, age 48, is Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Mr. Esplin has served as Chief Financial Officer of all of the Huntsman companies since 1999. From 1994 to 1999, Mr. Esplin served as our Treasurer. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1994, Mr. Esplin was a Vice President in the Investment Banking Division of Bankers Trust Company, where he worked for seven years. Mr. Esplin also serves as a director of Nutraceutical International Corporation, a publicly traded nutrition supplements company.

        James R. Moore, age 66, is Executive Vice President and General Counsel and Secretary. Prior to his appointment to this position in January 2010, Mr. Moore served as our Vice President and Deputy General Counsel since 2003. Prior to that, Mr. Moore served as Vice President and Chief Environmental Counsel from 2002 to 2003 and Senior Environmental Counsel from 1998 to 2002. From 1989 until joining our Company in 1998, Mr. Moore was a partner at the Seattle law firm of Perkins Coie. Mr. Moore also previously served as a trial attorney with the U.S. Department of Justice, an assistant U.S. Attorney and Regional Counsel, Region 10, of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

        Andre Genton, age 51, is Division President, Advanced Materials. Prior to his appointment to this position in February 2009, Mr. Genton served as Vice President & Global Operating Officer for our Advanced Materials business since November 2006. From January 2005 to November 2006, he served as Vice President Design & Composites Engineering for our Advanced Materials business. From June 2003 to January 2005 he served as Vice President Global Structural Composites for our Advanced Materials business. Prior to joining Huntsman in 2003, Mr. Genton held a variety of positions with Vantico (formerly a part of Ciba).

        Anthony P. Hankins, age 53, is Division President, Polyurethanes and Chief Executive Officer, Asia Pacific. Mr. Hankins was appointed to these positions in March 2004 and February 2011, respectively. From May 2003 to February 2004, Mr. Hankins served as President, Performance Products, from January 2002 to April 2003, he served as Global Vice President, Rigids Division for our Polyurethanes business, from October 2000 to December 2001, he served as Vice President—Americas for our Polyurethanes business, and from March 1998 to September 2000, he served as Vice President—Asia Pacific for our Polyurethanes business. Mr. Hankins worked for ICI from 1980 to February 1998, when he joined our Company. At ICI, Mr. Hankins held numerous management positions in the plastics, fibers and polyurethanes businesses. He has extensive international experience, having held senior management positions in Europe, Asia and the U.S.

        Paul G. Hulme, age 54, is Division President, Textile Effects. Mr. Hulme was appointed to this position in February 2009. From June 2003 to February 2009, Mr. Hulme served as Division President, Materials and Effects. From February 2000 to May 2003, Mr. Hulme served as Vice President, Performance Chemicals, and from December 1999 to February 2000 he served as Operations Director, Polyurethanes. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1999, Mr. Hulme held various positions with ICI in finance, accounting and information systems roles. Mr. Hulme is a Chartered Accountant.

        Stewart A. Monteith, age 54, is Division President, Performance Products. Mr. Monteith was appointed to this position in February 2011. Prior to that time, Mr. Monteith served as Vice President of the Performance Specialties Division, a position he held since August 2003. He also served as Vice President for Global Markets and Business Development. Mr. Monteith joined Huntsman in 1994. Prior to joining Huntsman, Mr. Monteith held various positions with Texaco Chemical Company and Union Carbide.

        Simon Turner, age 47, is Division President, Pigments. Prior to his appointment to this position in November 2008, Mr. Turner served as Senior Vice President, Pigments since April 2008. From

53


Table of Contents


September 2004 to April 2008, Mr. Turner served as Vice President of Global Sales and from July 1999 to September 2004, he held positions including General Manager Co-Products and Director Supply Chain and Shared Services. Prior to joining Huntsman in July 1999, Mr. Turner held various positions with ICI.

        Ronald W. Gerrard, age 51, is Senior Vice President, Environmental, Health & Safety and Manufacturing Excellence. Mr. Gerrard was appointed to this position in June 2009. Prior to this appointment, Mr. Gerrard served as Vice President, Global Operations and Technology in our Polyurethanes business from May 2004 to June 2009. From 1999 to May 2004, Mr. Gerrard served as Vice President, Asia; Business Director, Flexible Foams; and Director, EHS and Engineering, also within our Polyurethanes business. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1999, Mr. Gerrard had worked for ICI and for EVC, a joint venture between ICI and Enichem. Mr. Gerrard is a Chartered Engineer.

        Brian V. Ridd, age 53, is Senior Vice President, Purchasing. Mr. Ridd has held this position since July 2000. Mr. Ridd served as Vice President, Purchasing from December 1995 until he was appointed to his current position. Mr. Ridd joined Huntsman in 1984.

        R. Wade Rogers, age 45, is Senior Vice President, Global Human Resources. Mr. Rogers has held this position since August 2009. From May 2004 to August 2009, Mr. Rogers served as Vice President, Global Human Resources, from October 2003 to May 2004, Mr. Rogers served as Director, Human Resources—Americas and from August 2000 to October 2003, he served as Director, Human Resources for our Polymers and Base Chemicals businesses. From the time he joined Huntsman in 1994 to August 2000, Mr. Rogers served as Area Manager, Human Resources—Jefferson County Operations. Prior to joining Huntsman, Mr. Rogers held a variety of positions with Texaco Chemical Company.

        Russ R. Stolle, age 48, is Senior Vice President and Deputy General Counsel. Mr. Stolle was appointed to this position in January 2010. From October 2006 to January 2010, Mr. Stolle served as our Senior Vice President, Global Public Affairs and Communications, from November 2002 to October 2006, he served as Vice President and Deputy General Counsel, from October 2000 to November 2002 he served as Vice President and Chief Technology Counsel and from April 1994 to October 2000 he served as Chief Patent and Licensing Counsel. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1994, Mr. Stolle had been an attorney with Texaco Inc. and an associate with the law firm of Baker & Botts.

        L. Russell Healy, age 55, is Vice President and Controller. Mr. Healy has served in this capacity since April 2004. From August 2001 to April 2004, Mr. Healy served as Vice President, Finance, from July 1999 to July 2001, he served as Vice President and Finance Director for Huntsman International, and from October 1995 to June 1999, he served as Vice President, Tax. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1995, Mr. Healy was a partner with the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche LLP. Mr. Healy is a Certified Public Accountant and holds a master's degree in accounting.

        Sean Douglas, age 46, is our Vice President, Corporate Development since December 2009. Mr. Douglas served as Vice President and Treasurer from 2002 to December 2009, Vice President, Finance from July 2001 to 2002 and Vice President, Administration from January 1997 to July 2001. Mr. Douglas is a Certified Public Accountant and, prior to joining Huntsman in 1990, worked for the accounting firm of Price Waterhouse.

        Kevin C. Hardman, age 47, is Vice President, Tax. Mr. Hardman served as Chief Tax Officer from 1999 until he was appointed to his current position in 2002. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1999, Mr. Hardman was a tax Senior Manager with the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche LLP, where he worked for 10 years. Mr. Hardman is a Certified Public Accountant and holds a master's degree in tax accounting.

        John R. Heskett, age 42, is Vice President, Treasury and Planning. Mr. Heskett has held this position since December 2009. From September 2008 until October 2009, Mr. Heskett served as a Vice President at Boart Longyear Limited, a publicly-listed exploration drilling services and products

54


Table of Contents


company. Mr. Heskett previously served as Vice President, Corporate Development and Investor Relations for our Company from August 2004 until September 2008 and was appointed Vice President, Corporate Development in 2002. Mr. Heskett also served as Assistant Treasurer for our Company and several of our subsidiaries. Prior to joining Huntsman in 1997, Mr. Heskett was Assistant Vice President and Relationship Manager for PNC Bank, N.A., where he worked for a number of years.

        Steven C. Jorgensen, age 42, is Vice President of Internal Audit and Controls. Mr. Jorgensen was appointed to this position effective May 2007. Mr. Jorgensen joined Huntsman in May 2004 as Director of Internal Controls and in May 2005 was appointed as Director of Internal Audit and Controls. Prior to joining Huntsman, Mr. Jorgensen was Vice President and Audit Manager with General Electric Consumer Finance, and prior to that he was an audit Senior Manager with the accounting firm of Deloitte & Touche LLP. Mr. Jorgensen is a Certified Public Accountant and holds a masters degree in accounting.

        Kurt D. Ogden, age 42, is Vice President, Investor Relations. Prior to his appointment to this position in February 2009, Mr. Ogden served as Director, Corporate Finance since October 2004. Prior to joining Huntsman in 2004, Mr. Ogden held various positions with Hillenbrand Industries, Pliant Corporation and Huntsman Chemical Corporation. Mr. Ogden is a Certified Public Accountant and holds a master's degree in business administration.

        Maria Csiba-Womersley, age 52, is Vice President and Chief Information Officer. Ms. Csiba-Womersley was appointed to this position effective September 2006. Ms. Csiba-Womersley served as Global eBusiness Director from 2004 to 2006 and also served as our Director of Global IT Planning and Security. Previously, Ms. Csiba-Womersley was a Regional Polymer Sales Manager, a Business Director for Polypropylene and Director of Polymer Logistics. Ms. Csiba-Womersley joined Huntsman in 1997.

55


Table of Contents


PART II

ITEM 5.    MARKET FOR REGISTRANT'S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

MARKET INFORMATION AND HOLDERS

        Our common stock is listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "HUN." As of February 7, 2011, there were approximately 193 stockholders of record and the closing price of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange was $17.72 per share.

        The reported high and low sale prices of our common stock on the New York Stock Exchange for each of the periods set forth below are as follows:

Period
  High   Low  

2010

             
 

First Quarter

  $ 14.24   $ 10.92  
 

Second Quarter

    13.01     8.17  
 

Third Quarter

    11.74     8.20  
 

Fourth Quarter

    16.89     11.35  

 

Period
  High   Low  

2009

             
 

First Quarter

  $ 3.82   $ 2.04  
 

Second Quarter

    7.30     3.06  
 

Third Quarter

    9.85     4.95  
 

Fourth Quarter

    11.57     7.68  

DIVIDENDS

        The following tables represent dividends on common stock for our Company for the years ended December 31, (dollars in millions, except per share payment amounts):

 
  2010  
Payment date
  Record date   Per share
payment amount
  Total amount
paid
 

March 31, 2010

    March 15, 2010   $ 0.10   $ 24  

June 30, 2010

    June 15, 2010     0.10     24  

September 30, 2010

    September 15, 2010     0.10     24  

December 31, 2010

    December 15, 2010     0.10     24  
                   
 

Total

              $ 96  
                   

 

 
  2009  
Payment date
  Record date   Per share
payment amount
  Total amount
paid
 

March 31, 2009

    March 16, 2009   $ 0.10   $ 24  

June 30, 2009

    June 15, 2009     0.10     24  

September 30, 2009

    September 15, 2009     0.10     24  

December 31, 2009

    December 15, 2009     0.10     24  
                   
 

Total

              $ 96  
                   

56


Table of Contents


 
  2008  
Payment date
  Record date   Per share
payment amount
  Total amount
paid
 

March 31, 2008

    March 14, 2008   $ 0.10   $ 23  

June 30, 2008

    June 16, 2008     0.10     23  

September 30, 2008

    September 15, 2008     0.10     23  

December 31, 2008

    December 15, 2008     0.10     24  
                   
 

Total

              $ 93  
                   

PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES BY THE COMPANY

        The following table presents shares of restricted stock granted under our Stock Incentive Plan that we withheld upon vesting to satisfy our tax withholding obligations during the three months ended December 31, 2010. We have no publicly announced plans or programs to repurchase our common stock.

Period
  Total Number
of Shares
Purchased
  Average Price
Paid per Share
  Total Number
of Shares
Purchased as Part of
Publicly Announced
Plans or Programs
  Maximum Number
(or Approximate Dollar
Value) of Shares that
May Yet Be Purchased Under
the Plans or Programs
 

October

      $          

November

                 

December

    2,108     16.66          
                   
 

Total

    2,108   $ 16.66          
                   

STOCK PERFORMANCE GRAPH

        Information relating to our stock performance graph will be contained in the definitive proxy statement for the annual meeting of our stockholders and is incorporated herein by reference.

57


Table of Contents

ITEM 6.    SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

        The selected historical financial data set forth below presents our historical financial data as of and for the dates and periods indicated. You should read the selected financial data in conjunction with Part II. Item 7. "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" and our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes.

Huntsman Corporation

 
  Year ended December 31,  
(in millions except per share amounts)
  2010   2009   2008   2007   2006  

Statements of Operations Data:

                               

Revenues

  $ 9,250   $ 7,665   $ 10,056   $ 9,496   $ 8,536  

Gross profit

    1,461     1,078     1,280     1,535     1,414  

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs

    29     88     31     29     8  

Operating income

    410     13     197     553     655  

(Expenses) income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation(a)

    (4 )   835     780     (210 )    

(Loss) income from continuing operations

    (9 )   125     512     61     321  

Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of tax(b)

    42     (19 )   84     (235 )   (144 )

Extraordinary (loss) gain on the acquisition of a business, net of tax of nil(c)

    (1 )   6     14     (7 )   56  

Net income (loss)

    32     112     610     (181 )   233  

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation

    27     114     609     (172 )   230  

Basic (loss) income per common share:

                               

(Loss) income from continuing operations attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders

  $ (0.06 ) $ 0.54   $ 2.20   $ 0.32   $ 1.44  

Income (loss) from discontinued operations attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders, net of tax(b)

    0.17     (0.08 )   0.36     (1.07 )   (0.65 )

Extraordinary gain (loss) on the acquisition of a business attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders, net of tax(c)

        0.03     0.06     (0.03 )   0.25  
                       

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders

  $ 0.11   $ 0.49   $ 2.62   $ (0.78 ) $ 1.04  
                       

Diluted (loss) income per common share:

                               

(Loss) income from continuing operations attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders

  $ (0.06 ) $ 0.53   $ 2.18   $ 0.30   $ 1.36  

Income (loss) from discontinued operations attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders, net of tax(b)

    0.17     (0.08 )   0.36     (1.01 )   (0.61 )

Extraordinary gain (loss) on the acquisition of a business attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders, net of tax(c)

        0.03     0.06     (0.03 )   0.24  
                       

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation common stockholders

  $ 0.11   $ 0.48   $ 2.60   $ (0.74 ) $ 0.99  
                       

Other Data:

                               

Depreciation and amortization

  $ 405   $ 442   $ 398   $ 413   $ 465  

Capital expenditures

    236     189     418     665     550  

Dividends per share

    0.40     0.40     0.40     0.40      

Balance Sheet Data (at period end):

                               

Total assets

  $ 8,714   $ 8,626   $ 8,058   $ 8,166   $ 8,445  

Total debt

    4,150     4,217     3,888     3,574     3,645  

Total liabilities

    6,864     6,761     6,426     6,313     6,679  

(a)
For information regarding (expenses) income associated with our terminated merger with a subsidiary of Hexion (the "Terminated Merger" or the "Hexion Merger") and the related litigation, see "Note 26. (Expenses) Income Associated with the Terminated Merger and Related Litigation" to our consolidated financial statements.

(b)
Income (loss) from discontinued operations represents the operating results, fire insurance settlement gains and loss on disposal of our former Australian styrenics business, our former U.S. base chemicals business, our former North American polymers business, our former European base chemicals and polymers business and our former TDI business. The U.S. base chemicals business was sold on November 5, 2007, the North American polymers business was sold on August 1, 2007, the European base chemicals and polymers business was sold on December 29, 2006 and the TDI business was sold on July 6, 2005. See "Note 27. Discontinued Operations" and "Note 25. Casualty Losses and Insurance Recoveries" to our consolidated financial statements.

(c)
The extraordinary gain (loss) on the acquisition of a business relates to the June 30, 2006 acquisition of our textile effects business. See "Note 3. Business Combinations—Textile Effects Acquisition" to our consolidated financial statements.

58


Table of Contents

ITEM 7.   MANAGEMENT'S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

OVERVIEW

        We are a global manufacturer of differentiated organic chemical products and of inorganic chemical products. Our products comprise a broad range of chemicals and formulations, which we market globally to a diversified group of consumer and industrial customers. Our products are used in a wide range of applications, including those in the adhesives, aerospace, automotive, construction products, durable and non-durable consumer products, electronics, medical, packaging, paints and coatings, power generation, refining, synthetic fiber, textile chemicals and dye industries. We are a leading global producer in many of our key product lines, including MDI, amines, surfactants, epoxy-based polymer formulations, textile chemicals, dyes, maleic anhydride and titanium dioxide. Our administrative, research and development and manufacturing operations are primarily conducted at the facilities listed in "—Item 2. Properties" above, which are located in 30 countries. We employed approximately 12,000 associates worldwide at December 31, 2010.

        We operate in five segments: Polyurethanes, Performance Products, Advanced Materials, Textile Effects and Pigments. Our Polyurethanes, Performance Products, Advanced Materials and Textile Effects segments produce differentiated organic chemical products and our Pigments segment produces inorganic chemical products. In a series of transactions beginning in 2006, we have sold or shutdown substantially all of our former Australian styrenics, Polymers and Base Chemicals operations. We report the results from our former Australian styrenics, Polymers and Base Chemicals businesses as discontinued operations. See "Note 27. Discontinued Operations" to our consolidated financial statements.

        Growth in our Polyurethanes, Advanced Materials and Textile Effects segments has been driven by the continued substitution of our products for other materials across a broad range of applications, as well as by the level of global economic activity. Historically, demand for many of these products has grown at rates in excess of GDP growth. In Polyurethanes, this growth, driven largely by Asia, has in recent years resulted in improved demand and higher industry capacity utilization rates for many of our key products, including MDI.

        In our Performance Products segment, demand for our performance specialties has generally continued to grow at rates in excess of GDP as overall demand is significantly influenced by new product and application development. Demand for most of our performance intermediates has grown in line with GDP growth. Over time, demand for maleic anhydride has generally grown at rates that slightly exceed GDP growth. However, given its dependence on the UPR market, which is influenced by construction end markets, maleic anhydride demand can be cyclical.

        Historically, demand for titanium dioxide pigments has grown at rates approximately equal to global GDP growth. Pigment prices have historically reflected industry-wide operating rates but have typically lagged behind movements in these rates by up to twelve months due to the effects of product stocking and destocking by customers and producers, contract arrangements and seasonality. The industry experiences some seasonality in its sales because sales of paints, the largest end use for titanium dioxide, generally peak during the spring and summer months in the northern hemisphere. This results in greater sales volumes in the second and third quarters of the year.

        In January 2010, we idled our PO/MTBE production facility at Port Neches, Texas for turnaround and inspection. This planned shutdown concluded on March 17, 2010. The financial impact on our first quarter results was estimated to be approximately $40 million, including unabsorbed fixed costs.

        For further information regarding sales price and demand trends, see "Results of Operations—Segment Analysis—Year-Over-Prior Year Increase (Decrease)" and "Results of Operations—Segment Analysis—Fourth Quarter 2010 vs. Third Quarter 2010 Increase (Decrease)" below.

59


Table of Contents

OUTLOOK

        We believe that global demand for most of our products is recovering and underlying trends within our businesses are also encouraging. Average selling prices increased sequentially on an annual and quarterly basis within our largest businesses and our capacity utilization rates are improving on a seasonally adjusted basis. Early indicators for 2011 give us a high degree of optimism that we will continue to see improving markets globally. Nevertheless, we recognize that there are significant continuing economic risks that could materially impact our earnings performance. While we anticipate that our raw material and energy costs will remain at elevated levels in response to increased demand, we expect our margins will continue to strengthen over the next few years.

        Our management believes that our strategic and financial approach to the operation of our business—focusing on growth in Asia and other emerging markets and debt reduction—will provide us a foundation for long-term earnings growth. Given current improving global economic trends, it appears reasonable that we could achieve Adjusted EBITDA of $1,325 million within the next two to three years.

RECENT DEVELOPMENTS

        For a discussion of recent developments, see "—Item 1. Business—Recent Developments" above.

60


Table of Contents

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

        For each of our Company and Huntsman International, the following tables set forth the consolidated results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2010, 2009 and 2008 (dollars in millions):

Huntsman Corporation

 
   
   
   
  Percent Change  
 
  Year ended December 31,  
 
  2010 vs 2009   2009 vs 2008  
 
  2010   2009   2008  

Revenues

  $ 9,250   $ 7,665   $ 10,056     21 %   (24 )%

Cost of goods sold

    7,789     6,587     8,776     18 %   (25 )%
                           

Gross profit

    1,461     1,078     1,280     36 %   (16 )%

Operating expenses

    1,022     977     1,052     5 %   (7 )%

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs

    29     88     31     (67 )%   184 %
                           

Operating income

    410     13     197     NM     (93 )%

Interest expense, net

    (229 )   (238 )   (262 )   (4 )%   (9 )%

Loss on accounts receivable securitization program

        (23 )   (27 )   NM     (15 )%

Equity in income of investment in unconsolidated affiliates

    24     3     14     700 %   (79 )%

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

    (183 )   (21 )   (1 )   771 %   NM  

(Expenses) income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation

    (4 )   835     780     NM     7 %

Other income

    2         1     NM     NM  
                           

Income from continuing operations before income taxes

    20     569     702     (96 )%   (19 )%

Income tax expense

    29     444     190     (93 )%   134 %
                           

Income (loss) from continuing operations

    (9 )   125     512     NM     (76 )%

Income (loss) from discontinued operations (including gain on disposal of $1 in 2009, $11 in 2008), net of tax

    42     (19 )   84     NM     NM  

Extraordinary (loss) gain on the acquisition of a business, net of tax of nil

    (1 )   6     14     NM     (57 )%
                           

Net income

    32     112     610     (71 )%   (82 )%

Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests

    (5 )   2     (1 )   NM     NM  
                           

Net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation

    27     114     609     (76 )%   (81 )%

Interest expense, net

    229     238     262     (4 )%   (9 )%

Interest expense of discontinued operations, net

            1     NM     NM  

Income tax expense from continuing operations

    29     444     190     (93 )%   134 %

Income tax (benefit) expense from discontinued operations

    10     (80 )   69     NM     NM  

Depreciation and amortization

    405     442     398     (8 )%   11 %
                           

EBITDA(1)

  $ 700   $ 1,158   $ 1,529     (40 )%   (24 )%
                           

Net income (loss) per share:

                               
 

Basic

  $ 0.11   $ 0.49   $ 2.62     (78 )%   (81 )%
 

Diluted

    0.11     0.48     2.60     (79 )%   (82 )%

Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities

    (58 )   1,104     767     NM     44 %

Net cash used in investing activities

    (182 )   (205 )   (489 )   (11 )%   (58 )%

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

    (543 )   184     230     NM     (20 )%

Other non-GAAP measures:

                               

Adjusted EBITDA(1)

  $ 872   $ 529   $ 668     65 %   (21 )%

Adjusted net income (loss)(2)

    200     (303 )   (29 )   NM     945 %

Adjusted income (loss) per share(2):

                               
 

Basic

    0.85     (1.30 )   (0.13 )   NM     900 %
 

Diluted

    0.83     (1.30 )   (0.13 )   NM     900 %

Capital expenditures, net of reimbursements(3)

    202     189     418     7 %   (55 )%

61


Table of Contents

Huntsman International

 
   
   
   
  Percent Change  
 
  Year ended December 31,  
 
  2010 vs 2009   2009 vs 2008  
 
  2010   2009   2008  

Revenues

  $ 9,250   $ 7,665   $ 10,056     21 %   (24 )%

Cost of goods sold

    7,772     6,570     8,759     18 %   (25 )%
                           

Gross profit

    1,478     1,095     1,297     35 %   (16 )%

Operating expenses

    1,006     966     1,051     4 %   (8 )%

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs

    29     88     31     (67 )%   184 %
                           

Operating income

    443     41     215     980 %   (81 )%

Interest expense, net

    (248 )   (240 )   (263 )   3 %   (9 )%

Loss on accounts receivable securitization program

        (23 )   (27 )   NM     (15 )%

Equity in income of investment in unconsolidated affiliates

    24     3     14     700 %   (79 )%

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

    (37 )   (21 )   (1 )   76 %   NM  

Other income

    2         1     NM     NM  
                           

Income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes

    184     (240 )   (61 )   NM     293 %

Income tax expense (benefit)

    40     159     (2 )   (75 )%   NM  
                           

Income (loss) from continuing operations

    144     (399 )   (59 )   NM     576 %

Income (loss) from discontinued operations (including gain on disposal of $1 in 2009, $11 in 2008), net of tax

    42     (19 )   84     NM     NM  

Extraordinary (loss) gain on the acquisition of a business, net of tax of nil

    (1 )   6     14     NM     (57 )%
                           

Net income

    185     (412 )   39     NM     NM  

Net (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests

    (5 )   2     (1 )   NM     NM  
                           

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman International LLC

    180     (410 )   38     NM     NM  

Interest expense, net

    248     240     263     3 %   (9 )%

Interest expense of discontinued operations, net

            1     NM     NM  

Income tax expense (benefit) from continuing operations

    40     159     (2 )   (75 )%   NM  

Income tax expense (benefit) from discontinued operations

    10     (80 )   69     NM     NM  

Depreciation and amortization

    382     420     374     (9 )%   12 %
                           

EBITDA(1)

  $ 860   $ 329   $ 743     161 %   (56 )%
                           

Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities

    (46 )   420     39     NM     977 %

Net cash used in investing activities

    (238 )   (212 )   (314 )   12 %   (32 )%

Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities

    (78 )   619     213     NM     191 %

Other non-GAAP measures:

                               

Adjusted EBITDA(1)

  $ 882   $ 535   $ 662     65 %   (19 )%

Adjusted net income(2)

    212     (301 )   (25 )   NM     NM  

Capital expenditures, net of reimbursements(3)

    202     189     418     7 %   55 %

NM—Not meaningful

(1)
EBITDA is defined as net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International LLC, as appropriate, before interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization. We believe that EBITDA enhances an investor's understanding of our financial performance. However, EBITDA should not be considered in isolation or viewed as a substitute for net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International LLC, as appropriate, or other measures of performance as defined by GAAP. Moreover, EBITDA as used herein is not necessarily comparable to other similarly titled measures of other companies due to potential inconsistencies in the method of calculation. Our management uses EBITDA to assess financial performance by reviewing EBITDA as a general indicator of economic performance compared with prior periods. Because EBITDA excludes interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization, EBITDA provides an indicator of general economic performance that is not affected by debt restructurings, fluctuations in interest rates or effective tax rates, or levels of depreciation and amortization. Accordingly, our management believes this type of measurement is useful for comparing general operating performance from period to period and making certain related management decisions. EBITDA is also used by securities analysts, lenders and others in their evaluation of different companies because it excludes certain items that can vary widely across different industries or among companies within the same industry. For example, interest expense can be highly dependent on a company's capital structure, debt levels and credit ratings. Therefore, the impact of interest expense on earnings can vary significantly among companies. In addition, the tax positions of companies can vary because of their differing abilities to take advantage of tax benefits and because of

62


Table of Contents


the tax policies of the various jurisdictions in which they operate. As a result, effective tax rates and tax expense can vary considerably among companies. Finally, companies employ productive assets of different ages and utilize different methods of acquiring and depreciating such assets. This can result in considerable variability in the relative costs of productive assets and the depreciation and amortization expense among companies. Nevertheless, our management recognizes that there are material limitations associated with the use of EBITDA in the evaluation of our Company as compared to net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International LLC, as appropriate, which reflects overall financial performance, including the effects of interest, income taxes, depreciation and amortization. EBITDA excludes interest expense. Because we have borrowed money in order to finance our operations, interest expense is a necessary element of our costs and ability to generate revenue. Therefore, any measure that excludes interest expense has material limitations. EBITDA also excludes taxes. Because the payment of taxes is a necessary element of our operations, any measure that excludes tax expense has material limitations. Finally, EBITDA excludes depreciation and amortization expense. Because we use capital assets, depreciation and amortization expense is a necessary element of our costs and ability to generate revenue. Therefore, any measure that excludes depreciation and amortization expense has material limitations. Our management compensates for the limitations of using EBITDA by using it to supplement GAAP results to provide a more complete understanding of the factors and trends affecting the business rather than GAAP results alone. Our management also uses other metrics to evaluate capital structure, tax planning and capital investment decisions. For example, our management uses credit ratings and net debt ratios to evaluate capital structure, effective tax rate by jurisdiction to evaluate tax planning, and payback period and internal rate of return to evaluate capital investments. Our management also uses trade working capital to evaluate its investment in accounts receivable and inventory, net of accounts payable.

Adjusted EBITDA is computed by eliminating the following from EBITDA: unallocated foreign exchange gains or losses; loss or gain on early extinguishment of debt; legal settlements; loss on accounts receivable securitization programs (for periods prior to January 1, 2010); EBITDA from discontinued operations; acquisition costs; (expenses) income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation; gain on sale of a business; extraordinary loss (gain) on the acquisition of a business; and restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs. Adjusted EBITDA is presented solely as a supplemental disclosure to EBITDA and reported GAAP measures because we believe that it is indicative of our operating performance and is frequently used as a valuation measure of chemical companies. Our management also uses Adjusted EBITDA to evaluate the core operating performance of our segments and business.

In addition to the limitations of EBITDA noted above, Adjusted EBITDA excludes items that may be recurring in nature and should not be disregarded in the evaluation of performance. However, we believe it is useful to exclude such items to provide a supplemental analysis of current results and trends compared to other periods for the following reasons: certain excluded items can vary significantly depending on specific underlying transactions or events, and the variability of such items may not relate specifically to current operating results or trends; and certain excluded items, while potentially recurring in future periods, may not be indicative of future results.

Adjusted EBITDA should not be construed as an alternative to net income applicable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International, as appropriate, as an indicator of performance, or as any other measure determined in accordance with GAAP.

We believe that net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International, as appropriate, is the performance measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP that is most directly comparable to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA. For each of our Company and Huntsman International, the following tables reconcile net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International LLC, as appropriate to EBITDA and Adjusted EBITDA (dollars in millions):

63


Table of Contents

    Huntsman Corporation

   
  Year ended December 31,  
   
  2010   2009   2008  
 

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation

  $ 27   $ 114   $ 609  
 

Interest expense, net

    229     238     262  
 

Interest expense of discontinued operations, net

            1  
 

Income tax expense from continuing operations

    29     444     190  
 

Income tax (benefit) expense from discontinued operations

    10     (80 )   69  
 

Depreciation and amortization

    405     442     398  
                 
 

EBITDA

    700     1,158     1,529  
 

Foreign exchange (gains) losses—unallocated

    (3 )   (16 )   31  
 

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

    183     21     1  
 

Legal settlements

    8          
 

Loss on accounts receivable securitization program

        23     27  
 

Amounts included in discontinued operations

    (53 )   97     (156 )
 

Acquisition expenses

    3          
 

Expenses (income) associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation

    4     (835 )   (780 )
 

Gain on sale of business/assets

        (1 )   (1 )
 

Extraordinary loss (gain) on the acquisition of a business

    1     (6 )   (14 )
 

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs (credits):

                   
   

Polyurethanes

        2      
   

Performance Products

    3         1  
   

Advanced Materials

    (2 )   13     1  
   

Textile Effects

    15     6     24  
   

Pigments

    8     53     4  
   

Corporate and other

    5     14     1  
                 
     

Total restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs

    29     88     31  
                 
 

Adjusted EBITDA

  $ 872   $ 529   $ 668  
                 

    Huntsman International

   
  Year ended December 31,  
   
  2010   2009   2008  
 

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman International

  $ 180   $ (410 ) $ 38  
 

Interest expense, net

    248     240     263  
 

Interest expense of discontinued operations, net

            1  
 

Income tax expense from continuing operations

    40     159     (2 )
 

Income tax (benefit) expense from discontinued operations

    10     (80 )   69  
 

Depreciation and amortization

    382     420     374  
                 
 

EBITDA

    860     329     743  
 

Foreign exchange (gains) losses—unallocated

    (3 )   (16 )   31  
 

Loss on early extinguishment of debt

    37     21     1  
 

Legal settlements

    8          
 

Loss on accounts receivable securitization program

        23     27  
 

Amounts included in discontinued operations

    (53 )   97     (156 )
 

Acquisition expenses

    3          
 

Gain on sale of business/assets

        (1 )   (1 )
 

Extraordinary loss (gain) on the acquisition of a business

    1     (6 )   (14 )
 

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs (credits):

                   
   

Polyurethanes

        2      
   

Performance Products

    3         1  
   

Advanced Materials

    (2 )   13     1  
   

Textile Effects

    15     6     24  
   

Pigments

    8     53     4  
   

Corporate and other

    5     14     1  
                 
     

Total restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs

    29     88     31  
                 
 

Adjusted EBITDA

  $ 882   $ 535   $ 662  
                 

64


Table of Contents

(2)
Adjusted net income (loss) is computed by eliminating the after-tax amounts related to the following from net income applicable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International, as appropriate: unallocated foreign exchange gains or losses; loss or gain on early extinguishment of debt; legal settlements; loss on accounts receivable securitization programs (for periods prior to January 1, 2010); income (loss) from discontinued operations; acquisition costs; (expenses) income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation; gain on sale of a business; extraordinary loss (gain) on the acquisition of a business; and restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs. The income tax impacts of each aforementioned item was calculated using the statutory rates in the applicable taxing jurisdiction and considering valuation allowances on deferred tax assets in each jurisdiction. Basic adjusted income (loss) per share excludes dilution and is computed by dividing adjusted net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period. Diluted income (loss) per share reflects all potential dilutive common shares outstanding during the period and is computed by dividing adjusted net income (loss) by the weighted average number of shares outstanding during the period increased by the number of additional shares that would have been outstanding as dilutive securities.

Adjusted net income (loss) and adjusted income (loss) per share amounts are presented solely as supplemental disclosures to net income applicable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International, as appropriate, and income (loss) per share because we believe that these measures are indicative of our operating performance. Adjusted net income (loss) and adjusted income (loss) per share exclude items that may be recurring in nature and should not be disregarded in the evaluation of performance. However, we believe it is useful to exclude such items to provide a supplemental analysis of current results and trends compared to other periods for the following reasons: certain excluded items can vary significantly depending on specific underlying transactions or events, and the variability of such items may not relate specifically to current operating results or trends; and certain excluded items, while potentially recurring in future periods, may not be indicative of future results.

Adjusted net income (loss) and adjusted income (loss) per share should not be construed as an alternative to net income (loss) applicable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International, as appropriate, or income (loss) per share as an indicator of performance, or as any other measure determined in accordance with GAAP.

We believe that net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International, as appropriate, and income (loss) per share are the performance measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP that are most directly comparable to Adjusted net income (loss) and adjusted income (loss) per share. For each of our Company and Huntsman International, the following tables reconcile net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation or Huntsman International LLC, as appropriate, to adjusted net income (loss) (dollars in millions):

    Huntsman Corporation

   
  Year ended December 31,  
   
  2010   2009   2008  
 

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman Corporation

  $ 27   $ 114   $ 609  
 

Foreign exchange (gains) losses—unallocated, net of tax of $3, $11 and $(22) in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

        (5 )   9  
 

Loss on early extinguishment of debt, net of tax of $(22), $(8) and $(1) in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    161     13      
 

Legal settlements, net of tax of $(3), nil and nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    5          
 

Discount amortization on settlement financing, net of tax of $(10), $(5) and nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    16     9      
 

Discontinued operations, net of tax of $10, $(80) and $69 in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    (42 )   19     (84 )
 

Acquisition expenses, net of tax of $(1), nil and nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    2     1      
 

Expenses (income) associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation, net of tax of $(1), $309 and $205 in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    3     (526 )   (575 )
 

Gain on sale of business/assets, net of tax of nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, each

        (1 )   (1 )
 

Extraordinary loss (gain) on the acquisition of a business, net of tax of nil for 2010, 2009 and 2008, each

    1     (6 )   (14 )
 

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs (credits), net of tax of $(2), $(9) and $(4) in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    27     79     27  
                 
 

Adjusted net income (loss)

  $ 200   $ (303 ) $ (29 )
                 
 

Weighted average shares-diluted

    241.0     233.9     232.0  
                 

65


Table of Contents

    Huntsman International

   
  Year ended December 31,  
   
  2010   2009   2008  
 

Net income (loss) attributable to Huntsman International

  $ 180   $ (410 ) $ 38  
 

Foreign exchange (gains) losses—unallocated, net of tax of $3, $11 and $(22) in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

        (5 )   9  
 

Loss on early extinguishment of debt, net of tax of $(14), $(8) and $(1) in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    23     13      
 

Legal settlements, net of tax of $(3), nil and nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    5          
 

Discount amortization on settlement financing, net of tax of $(10), $(5) and nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    16     9      
 

Discontinued operations, net of tax of $10, $(80) and $69 in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    (42 )   19     (84 )
 

Acquisition expenses, net of tax of $(1), nil and nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    2     1      
 

Gain on sale of business/assets, net of tax of nil in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

        (1 )   (1 )
 

Extraordinary loss (gain) on the acquisition of a business, net of tax of nil for 2010, 2009 and 2008, each

    1     (6 )   (14 )
 

Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs (credits), net of tax of $(2), $(9) and $(4) in 2010, 2009 and 2008, respectively

    27     79     27  
                 
 

Adjusted net income (loss)

  $ 212   $ (301 ) $ (25 )
                 
(3)
Capital expenditures, net of reimbursements represent cash paid for capital expenditures less reimbursements of capital expenditures from insurance settlements, other legal settlements and contributions from noncontrolling shareholders in consolidated entities. During 2010, 2009 and 2008, capital expenditures of $236 million, $189 million and $418 million, respectively, were reimbursed in part by $34 million, nil and nil, respectively, from insurance settlement proceeds. During 2010, we received $110 million from the settlement of our insurance claims related to the 2006 fire at our Port Arthur Texas plant, $34 million of which was considered as a reimbursement of capital expenditures.

Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared with Year Ended December 31, 2009

        For the year ended December 31, 2010, net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation was $27 million on revenues of $9,250 million, compared with net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation of $114 million on revenues of $7,665 million for 2009. For the year ended December 31, 2010, net income attributable to Huntsman International LLC was $180 million on revenues of $9,250 million, compared with net loss attributable to Huntsman International LLC of $410 million on revenues of $7,665 million for 2009. The decrease of $87 million in net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation and the increase of $590 million in net income attributable to Huntsman International LLC was the result of the following items:

    Revenues for 2010 increased by $1,585 million, or 21%, as compared with 2009 due principally to higher average selling prices and higher sales volumes in all our segments. See "—Segment Analysis" below.

    Our gross profit and the gross profit of Huntsman International for 2010 increased by $383 million each, or 36% and 35%, respectively as compared with 2009, resulting from higher gross margins in all of our segments except Polyurethanes. See "—Segment Analysis" below.

    Our operating expenses and the operating expenses of Huntsman International for 2010 increased by $45 million and $40 million, or 5% and 4%, respectively, as compared with 2009 due primarily to a $14 million increase in foreign currency transaction losses, $8 million of expenses related to legal settlements, $6 million of additional research and development expenditures, and higher selling, general and administrative expenses.

    Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs for 2010 decreased to $29 million from $88 million in 2009. For more information concerning restructuring activities, see "Note 11. Restructuring, Impairment and Plant Closing Costs" to our consolidated financial statements.

66


Table of Contents

    Our net interest expense for 2010 decreased by $9 million, or 4%, as compared with 2009, resulting primarily from a $12 million reduction in interest expense recognized in 2010 related to the ineffective portion of a cross currency swap and lower average outstanding debt balances, offset in part by higher interest expense associated with our A/R Programs. The net interest expense of Huntsman International for 2010 increased by $8 million, or 3%, as compared with 2009, resulting primarily from higher interest expense associated with our A/R Programs, offset by a $12 million reduction in interest expense recognized in 2010 related to the ineffective portion of a cross currency swap. For more information concerning the cross currency swap, see "Note 15. Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities—Foreign Exchange Rate Risk" to our consolidated financial statements. Upon the adoption of new accounting guidance in 2010, transfers of our accounts receivable under our A/R Programs no longer met the criteria for derecognition. Accordingly, the amounts outstanding under our A/R Programs are accounted for as secured borrowings beginning January 1, 2010. For more information, see "Note 14. Debt" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Equity income of investment in unconsolidated affiliates for 2010 increased to $24 million from $3 million in 2009. During 2010, we recorded a non-recurring $18 million credit to equity income of investment in unconsolidated affiliates to appropriately reflect our investment in the Sasol-Huntsman GmbH and Co. KG joint venture. For more information, see "Note 6. Investment in Unconsolidated Affiliates" to our consolidated financial statements.

    For the year ended December 31, 2010, we recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $183 million, and Huntsman International recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $37 million. For the year ended December 31, 2009, we and Huntsman International each recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $21 million. For more information see "Note 14. Debt—Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Expenses associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation in 2010 consisted primarily of $3 million of bonuses paid to certain members of the Board of Directors, upon the recommendation of an independent committee of the Board of Directors, for their efforts in connection with the litigation with Hexion and Apollo following the Terminated Merger. Income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation for 2009 consisted primarily of an $868 million gain related to the settlement agreement reached in our litigation with the banks that had entered into a commitment letter to provide funding for the Hexion Merger (the "Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement"), offset in part by litigation-related fees and employee retention bonuses. For more information, see "Note 26. (Expenses) Income Associated with the Terminated Merger and Related Litigation" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Our income tax expense decreased by $415 million to an expense of $29 million for 2010 as compared with an expense of $444 million for 2009. Huntsman International's income tax expense decreased by $119 million to an expense of $40 million for 2010 as compared with an expense of $159 million for 2009. Our and Huntsman International's tax obligations are affected by the mix of income and losses in the tax jurisdictions in which we operate. Other than pre-tax earnings, our income tax expense for 2010 as compared with 2009 was primarily impacted by the following: 2010 tax benefits associated with the release of valuation allowances of $20 million as compared to 2009 establishment of valuation allowances of $149 million; 2010 tax benefits of $4 million compared to the 2009 tax benefits of $38 million related to recognizing a tax benefit for operating losses in certain jurisdictions with valuation allowances and current other comprehensive income; and 2010 tax expense of $43 million related to non-tax deductible payments on the portion of the loss on early extinguishment of debt resulting from the redemption of convertible notes issued on December 23, 2008 in an aggregate amount of $250 million (the "Convertible Notes") treated as equity for tax purposes. Other than pre-tax

67


Table of Contents

      earnings, Huntsman International's income tax expense for 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily impacted by the following: 2010 tax benefits associated with the release of valuation allowances of $20 million as compared to the 2009 establishment of valuation allowances of $159 million; and 2010 tax benefits of $4 million compared to the 2009 tax benefit of $39 million related to recognizing a tax benefit for operating losses in certain jurisdictions with valuation allowances and current other comprehensive income. For further information concerning taxes, see "Note 19. Income Taxes" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Income from discontinued operations, net of tax, for 2010 was $42 million as compared to a loss of $19 million in 2009. This increase resulted principally from a $110 million pretax gain from the final settlement of our insurance claims related to the 2006 fire at our former Port Arthur, Texas plant and a pretax gain of $7 million from the settlement of insurance claims related to the 2005 gulf coast storms, offset in part by related income taxes, legal and other costs and by a $19 million loss from the recognition of cumulative currency translation losses upon the substantial liquidation of our former Australian styrenics business. See "Note 25. Casualty Losses and Insurance Recoveries" to our consolidated financial statements.

    During 2010, we recorded an extraordinary loss on the acquisition of a business, net of tax, of $1 million resulting from the settlement of contingent purchase price consideration related to our 2006 acquisition of Ciba's textile effects business (the "Textile Effects Acquisition"), offset in part by the reimbursement by Ciba of certain costs pursuant to the acquisition agreements. During 2009, we recorded an extraordinary gain on the acquisition of a business, net of tax, of $6 million related principally to the reversal of accruals for certain employee termination costs recorded in connection with the Textile Effects Acquisition that were no longer deemed necessary and a reimbursement by Ciba of certain costs pursuant to the acquisition agreements. For more information, see "Note 3. Business Combinations" to our consolidated financial statements.

Segment Analysis

        During the first quarter of 2010, we began reporting our LIFO inventory valuation reserves as part of Corporate and other; these reserves were previously reported in our Performance Products segment. During the fourth quarter of 2010, we began reporting the (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests in the reporting segment to which the subsidiary relates. Previously, (income) loss attributable to noncontrolling interests was reported in our Corporate and other segment. All relevant information for prior periods has been reclassified to reflect these changes.

68


Table of Contents

Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2009

        The following table sets forth the revenues and EBITDA for each of our operating segments (dollars in millions):

 
  Year ended December 31,    
 
 
  Percent
Change
 
 
  2010   2009  

Revenues

                   

Polyurethanes

  $ 3,605   $ 3,005     20 %

Performance Products

    2,659     2,090     27 %

Advanced Materials

    1,244     1,059     17 %

Textile Effects

    787     691     14 %

Pigments

    1,213     960     26 %

Eliminations

    (258 )   (140 )   84 %
                 

Total

  $ 9,250   $ 7,665     21 %
                 

Huntsman Corporation

                   

Segment EBITDA

                   

Polyurethanes

  $ 319   $ 388     (18 )%

Performance Products

    363     246     48 %

Advanced Materials

    143     59     142 %

Textile Effects

    1     (64 )   NM  

Pigments

    205     (25 )   NM  

Corporate and other

    (384 )   651     NM  
                 
 

Subtotal

    647     1,255     (48 )%

Discontinued Operations

    53     (97 )   NM  
                 

Total

  $ 700   $ 1,158     (40 )%
                 

Huntsman International

                   

Segment EBITDA

                   

Polyurethanes

  $ 319   $ 388     (18 )%

Performance Products

    363     246     48 %

Advanced Materials

    143     59     142 %

Textile Effects

    1     (64 )   NM  

Pigments

    205     (25 )   NM  

Corporate and other

    (224 )   (178 )   26 %
                 
 

Subtotal

    807     426     89 %

Discontinued Operations

    53     (97 )   NM  
                 

Total

  $ 860   $ 329     161 %
                 

69


Table of Contents


 
  Year ended December 31, 2010 vs. 2009  
 
  Average Selling Price(1)    
 
 
  Local
Currency
  Foreign Currency
Translation Impact
  Sales
Volumes(1)
 

Period-Over-Period Increase (Decrease)

                   

Polyurethanes

    13 %   (1 )%   4 %

Performance Products

    8 %       21 %

Advanced Materials

    8 %   (1 )%   11 %

Textile Effects

    6 %   1 %   6 %

Pigments

    11 %   (2 )%   17 %

Total Company

    9 %   (1 )%   12 %

 

 
  Fourth Quarter 2010 vs. Third Quarter 2010  
 
  Average Selling Price(1)    
 
 
  Local
Currency
  Foreign Currency
Translation Impact
  Sales
Volumes(1)
 

Period-Over-Period Increase (Decrease)

                   

Polyurethanes

    9 %   2 %   (11 )%

Performance Products

        2 %    

Advanced Materials

        3 %   (5 )%

Textile Effects

    (2 )%   2 %   (1 )%

Pigments

    5 %   3 %   (7 )%

Total Company

    5 %   2 %   (6 )%

(1)
Excludes revenues and sales volumes from tolling arrangements and byproducts.

NM—Not Meaningful

Polyurethanes

        The increase in revenues in our Polyurethanes segment for 2010 as compared to 2009 was primarily due to higher average selling prices for MDI products and MTBE and higher MDI product sales volumes. Average selling prices for MDI products and MTBE increased primarily in response to higher raw material costs. MDI products sales volumes were higher as demand in all major markets continued to recover from the worldwide economic downturn. PO/MTBE sales volumes decreased due to the planned 60 day maintenance outage at our Port Neches, Texas PO/MTBE facility in the first quarter of 2010. The decrease in segment EBITDA was primarily due to the estimated $40 million impact of the planned maintenance outage at our Port Neches, Texas facility and lower MTBE margins, offset in part by improvement in MDI sales volumes and margins.

Performance Products

        For 2010, our Performance Products segment revenues increased due to higher sales volumes and higher average selling prices when compared to 2009. Sales volumes increased primarily due to higher demand across almost all product groups and as a result of additional sales of a portion of our ethylene glycol production previously produced under tolling arrangements. Average selling prices increased across almost all product groups principally in response to continued strong market demand and higher raw material costs, partially offset by the strength of the U.S. dollar against major European currencies. The increase in segment EBITDA was primarily due to higher sales volumes and higher margins, partially offset by higher plant expenses and the impact of shut downs during the first quarter of 2010 at our Port Neches, Texas ethylene and ethylene oxide units which resulted in higher costs of approximately $11 million. In addition, during 2010, we recorded a non-recurring $18 million credit to

70


Table of Contents


equity income of investment in unconsolidated affiliates to appropriately reflect our investment in the Sasol-Huntsman joint venture.

Advanced Materials

        The increase in revenues in our Advanced Materials segment for 2010 compared to 2009 was due to higher sales volumes and higher average selling prices. Sales volumes increased in all markets primarily due to the worldwide economic recovery. Average selling prices increased in our base resins business primarily in response to higher raw material costs, offset in part by lower average selling prices in our specialty components and formulations markets, primarily as a result of changes in our product mix and competitive market pressures. The increase in segment EBITDA was primarily due to higher sales volumes and margins and lower restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs, partially offset by higher manufacturing costs. During 2010 and 2009, our Advanced Materials segment recorded restructuring, impairment and plant closing (credits) charges of $(2) million and $13 million, respectively. For more information concerning restructuring activities, see "Note 11. Restructuring, Impairment and Plant Closing Costs" to our consolidated financial statements.

Textile Effects

        The increase in revenues in our Textile Effects segment for 2010 compared to 2009 was due to higher average selling prices and higher sales volumes. Average selling prices increased primarily due to favorable changes in product mix. Sales volumes increased across all business lines due to the economic recovery in all regions of the world. The increase in segment EBITDA was primarily due to higher sales volumes and higher contribution margins, partially offset by higher restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs. During 2010 and 2009, our Textile Effects segment recorded restructuring, impairment and plant closing charges of $15 million and $6 million, respectively. For more information concerning restructuring activities, see "Note 11. Restructuring, Impairment and Plant Closing Costs" to our consolidated financial statements.

Pigments

        The increase in revenues in our Pigments segment for 2010 compared to 2009 was due to higher average selling prices and higher sales volumes. Average selling prices increased primarily as a result of higher selling prices in all regions of the world. Sales volumes increased primarily due to demand recovery in all regions of the world as a result of the worldwide economic recovery. The increase in segment EBITDA was primarily due to higher sales volumes, higher contribution margins and lower restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs. During 2010 and 2009, our Pigments segment recorded restructuring, impairment and plant closing charges of $8 million and $53 million, respectively. For more information concerning restructuring activities, see "Note 11. Restructuring, Impairment and Plant Closing Costs" to our consolidated financial statements.

Corporate and other—Huntsman Corporation

        Corporate and other includes unallocated corporate overhead, unallocated foreign exchange gains and losses, LIFO inventory valuation reserve adjustments, loss on early extinguishment of debt, (expenses) income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation, unallocated restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs, extraordinary gain (loss) on the acquisition of a business, loss on accounts receivable securitization program (for periods prior to 2010) and non-operating income and expense. For 2010, EBITDA from Corporate and other items decreased by $1,035 million to a loss of $384 million from earnings of $651 million for 2009. The decrease in EBITDA from Corporate and other for 2010 resulted primarily from a gain of $835 million in 2009 related to the Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement. For more information, see "Note 26. (Expenses) Income Associated with the Terminated Merger and Related Litigation" to our consolidated

71


Table of Contents


financial statements. Additionally, the decrease in EBITDA from Corporate and other was also attributable to an increase in loss on early extinguishment of debt of $162 million ($183 million of losses in 2010 compared to $21 million of losses in 2009), an increase of LIFO inventory valuation expense of $32 million ($18 million of expense in 2010 compared to $14 million of income in 2009), a $13 million decrease in unallocated foreign exchange gains ($3 million in gains in 2010 compared to $16 million in gains in 2009), a $7 million decrease in the extraordinary gain on the Textile Effects Acquisition ($1 million loss in 2010 compared to $6 million gain in 2009), and an increase in legal settlements of $8 million. For more information regarding the loss on early extinguishment of debt, see "Note 14. Debt—Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt" to our consolidated financial statements. For more information regarding extraordinary gain associated with the Textile Effects Acquisition, see "Note 3. Business Combinations—Textile Effects Acquisition" to our consolidated financial statements. The decrease in EBITDA was partially offset by a $23 million reduction in loss on accounts receivable securitization program. Upon the adoption of new accounting guidance in 2010, transfers of accounts receivable under our A/R Programs no longer met the criteria for derecognition. Accordingly, the amounts outstanding under our A/R Programs are accounted for as secured borrowings beginning January 1, 2010. For more information, see "Note 16. Off-Balance Sheet Securitization of Accounts Receivable" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Corporate and other—Huntsman International

        Corporate and other includes unallocated corporate overhead, unallocated foreign exchange gains and losses, LIFO inventory valuation reserve adjustments, loss on early extinguishment of debt, unallocated restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs, extraordinary gain (loss) on the acquisition of a business, loss on accounts receivable securitization program (for periods prior to 2010) and non-operating income and expense. For 2010, EBITDA from Corporate and other items decreased by $46 million to a loss of $224 million from a loss of $178 million for 2009. The decrease in EBITDA from Corporate and other for 2010 resulted primarily from an increase of LIFO inventory valuation expense of $32 million ($18 million of expense in 2010 compared to $14 million of income in 2009), a $13 million decrease in unallocated foreign exchange gains ($3 million in gains in 2010 compared to $16 million in gains in 2009), an increase in loss on early extinguishment of debt of $16 million ($37 million of losses in 2010 compared to $21 million of losses in 2009), and an increase in legal settlements of $8 million. For more information regarding the loss on early extinguishment of debt, see "Note 14. Debt—Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt" to our consolidated financial statements. The decrease to EBITDA was partially offset by a $23 million reduction in loss on accounts receivable securitization program. Upon the adoption of new accounting guidance in 2010, transfers of accounts receivable under our A/R Programs no longer met the criteria for derecognition. Accordingly, the amounts outstanding under our A/R Programs are accounted for as secured borrowings beginning January 1, 2010. For more information, see "Note 16. Off-Balance Sheet Securitization of Accounts Receivable" to our consolidated financial statements.

Discontinued Operations

        The operating results of our former polymers, base chemicals and Australian styrenics businesses are classified as discontinued operations, and, accordingly, the revenues of these businesses are excluded from revenues for all periods presented. The results of these former businesses are included in discontinued operations for all periods presented.

        Income from discontinued operations, net of tax, for 2010 was $42 million as compared to a loss of $19 million in 2009. The increase in income from discontinued operations resulted principally from a $110 million pretax gain recognized in the second quarter of 2010 in connection with the final settlement of our insurance claims related to the 2006 fire at our former Port Arthur, Texas plant and a pretax gain of $7 million from the settlement of insurance claims related to the 2005 gulf coast storms,

72


Table of Contents


offset in part by related income taxes, legal and other costs and by a $19 million loss from the recognition of cumulative currency translation losses upon the substantial liquidation of our former Australian styrenics business. See "Note 25. Casualty Losses and Insurance Recoveries" to our consolidated financial statements.

Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008

        For the year ended December 31, 2009, net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation was $114 million on revenues of $7,665 million compared with a net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation of $609 million on revenues of $10,056 million for 2008. For the year ended December 31, 2009, the net loss attributable to Huntsman International LLC was $410 million on revenues of $7,665 million compared with net income attributable to Huntsman International LLC of $38 million on revenues of $10,056 million for 2008. The decrease of $495 million in net income attributable to Huntsman Corporation and the increase of $448 million in net loss attributable to Huntsman International LLC was the result of the following:

    Revenues for 2009 decreased by $2,391 million, or 24%, as compared with 2008 due principally to lower average selling prices and sales volumes in all of our segments. See "—Segment Analysis" below.

    Our gross profit and the gross profit of Huntsman International for 2009 decreased by $202 million each, or 16% each, as compared with 2008. Lower gross profit in our Advanced Materials, Textile Effects, Performance Products and Pigments segments was offset somewhat by higher gross profit in our Polyurethanes segment. See "—Segment Analysis" below.

    Our operating expenses and the operating expenses of Huntsman International for 2009 decreased by $75 million and $85 million, or 7% and 8%, respectively, as compared with 2008. Operating expenses decreased by $45 million due to the impact of translating foreign currency amounts to the U.S. dollar as the U.S. dollar strengthened versus other relevant currencies. Also contributing to lower operating expenses was a $25 million increase in foreign exchange gains ($13 million of gains in 2009 as compared with $12 million of losses in 2008) and cost reduction efforts in response to the worldwide economic slowdown.

    Restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs for 2009 increased to $88 million from $31 million in 2008.

    Our net interest expense and the net interest expense of Huntsman International for 2009 decreased by $24 million and $23 million, 9% each, as compared with 2008. This decrease was primarily due to lower average interest rates.

    Income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation for 2009 consisted primarily of an $868 million gain related to the Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement, offset in part by litigation-related professional fees and employee retention bonuses of $33 million. Income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation for 2008 consisted primarily of $765 million related to the net proceeds from our settlement agreement with Hexion and Apollo (the "Apollo Settlement Agreement") and the recognition of the $100 million deferred credit related to the 2007 reimbursement of the $200 million termination fee paid to Basell pursuant to our merger agreement with Basell, offset in part by merger-related directors, legal and professional fees.

    During 2009, we recorded a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $21 million related primarily to the July 23, 2009 redemption of our 11.625% senior secured notes due 2010, and the August 3, 2009 redemption of our 11.5% senior notes due 2012.

73


Table of Contents

    Our income tax expense increased by $254 million to an expense of $444 million for 2009 as compared with an expense of $190 million for 2008. Huntsman International's income tax expense increased by $161 million to an expense of $159 million for 2009 as compared with a benefit of $2 million for 2008. Our and Huntsman International's tax obligations are affected by the mix of income and losses in the tax jurisdictions in which we operate. Our tax expense increased largely due to income recognized pursuant to the Apollo Settlement Agreement in connection with the Merger and current year tax expense associated with the establishment of valuation allowances of $149 million, primarily in the U.K., partially offset by a tax benefit of $38 million related to recognizing a tax benefit for operating losses in certain jurisdictions with valuation allowances and current other comprehensive income. Huntsman International's tax expense increased largely due to the establishment of valuation allowances of $159 million, primarily in the U.K., partially offset a tax benefit of $39 million related to recognizing a tax benefit for operating losses in certain jurisdictions with valuation allowances and current other comprehensive income.

    During 2009, we recorded an after tax loss from discontinued operations of $19 million related primarily to the operations of our former Australian styrenics business, legal costs incurred in connection with the ongoing arbitration of the fire insurance claim on our former Port Arthur, Texas olefins manufacturing plant and the settlement of product exchange liabilities. During 2008, we recorded after tax income from discontinued operations of $84 million related principally to a $175 million gain on partial fire insurance settlement, offset in part by the operations of our former Australian styrenics business and sales and use tax settlements and post-closing adjustments associated with our former base chemicals and polymers businesses.

    During 2009 and 2008, we recorded an extraordinary gain on the acquisition of a business, net of tax, of $6 million and $14 million, respectively, related primarily to the reversal of accruals for certain employee termination costs recorded in connection with the Textile Effects Acquisition that were no longer deemed necessary and a reimbursement by Ciba of certain costs pursuant to the acquisition agreements.

74


Table of Contents

Segment Analysis

Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2008

        The following table sets forth the revenues and EBITDA for each of our operating segments (dollars in millions):

 
  Year ended
December 31,
   
 
 
  Percent
Change
 
 
  2009   2008  

Revenues

                   

Polyurethanes

  $ 3,005   $ 4,055     (26 )%

Performance Products

    2,090     2,703     (23 )%

Advanced Materials

    1,059     1,492     (29 )%

Textile Effects

    691     903     (23 )%

Pigments

    960     1,072     (10 )%

Eliminations

    (140 )   (169 )   (17 )%
                 

Total

  $ 7,665   $ 10,056     (24 )%
                 

Huntsman Corporation

                   

Segment EBITDA

                   

Polyurethanes

  $ 388   $ 381     2 %

Performance Products

    246     274     (10 )%

Advanced Materials

    59     149     (60 )%

Textile Effects

    (64 )   (33 )   94 %

Pigments

    (25 )   17     NM  

Corporate and other

    651     585     11 %
                 
 

Subtotal

    1,255     1,373     (9 )%

Discontinued Operations

    (97 )   156     NM  
                 

Total

  $ 1,158   $ 1,529     (24 )%
                 

Huntsman International

                   

Segment EBITDA

                   

Polyurethanes

  $ 388   $ 381     2 %

Performance Products

    246     274     (10 )%

Advanced Materials

    59     149     (60 )%

Textile Effects

    (64 )   (33 )   94 %

Pigments

    (25 )   17     NM  

Corporate and other

    (178 )   (201 )   (11 )%
                 
 

Subtotal

    426     587     (27 )%

Discontinued Operations

    (97 )   156     NM  
                 

Total

  $ 329   $ 743     (56 )%
                 

75


Table of Contents


 
  Year ended December 31, 2009 vs. 2008  
 
  Average Selling Price(1)    
 
 
  Local
Currency
  Foreign Currency
Translation Impact
  Sales
Volumes(1)
 

Period-Over-Period Increase (Decrease)

                   

Polyurethanes

    (20 )%   (2 )%   (5 )%

Performance Products

    (19 )%   (2 )%   (3 )%

Advanced Materials

    (3 )%   (3 )%   (25 )%

Textile Effects

        (5 )%   (20 )%

Pigments

        (5 )%   (6 )%

Total Company

    (16 )%   (3 )%   (5 )%

(1)
Excludes revenues and sales volumes from tolling arrangements and byproducts.

NM—Not Meaningful

Polyurethanes

        The decrease in revenues in our Polyurethanes segment for 2009 as compared to 2008 was primarily due to overall lower average selling prices and lower MDI sales volumes. Average MDI selling prices decreased primarily due to competitive pressures, lower raw material costs and the effects of the movement of the U.S. dollar against the Euro. MDI sales volumes decreased due to lower demand in major European and Americas markets as a result of the worldwide economic slowdown. MTBE sales volumes increased relative to 2008, which was impacted by the 2008 U.S. Gulf Coast storms, while average selling prices decreased in response to lower raw material costs. The slight increase in EBITDA in the Polyurethanes segment was primarily the result of higher MTBE sales volumes and margins as well as the negative effects in 2008 from the U.S. Gulf Coast storms which were offset somewhat by lower MDI sales volumes and margins.

Performance Products

        For 2009, Performance Products segment revenues decreased due to lower sales volumes and lower selling prices when compared to 2008. Sales volumes decreased primarily from lower demand for almost all product lines as a result of the worldwide economic slowdown. The decrease in average selling prices was driven principally by lower raw material costs and the strengthening of the U.S. dollar against major European currencies and the Australian dollar. Performance Products segment EBITDA decreased mainly due to the fall in sales volumes and lower equity income partially offset by higher contribution margins as average selling prices fell more slowly than raw material and energy costs.

Advanced Materials

        The decrease in revenues in our Advanced Materials segment for 2009 compared to 2008 was due to lower sales volumes and lower average selling prices. Sales volumes decreased across all regions as a result of the worldwide economic slowdown. In addition, customers in our formulations and specialty components businesses depleted inventory over several quarters. Average selling prices in our base resins business decreased in response to lower raw material costs while average selling prices in our formulations and specialty components markets decreased as a result of changes in product mix, competitive pressures in our structural components for the ski, automotive and wind generation businesses, and the strength of the U.S. dollar against major European currencies. The decrease in EBITDA was primarily due to lower sales volumes and higher restructuring costs, partially offset by lower raw material and operating costs. During 2009 and 2008, our Advanced Materials segment recorded restructuring and plant closing charges of $13 million and $1 million, respectively.

76


Table of Contents

Textile Effects

        The decrease in revenues in our Textile Effects segment for 2009 compared to 2008 was due to lower sales volumes and lower average selling prices. Sales volumes decreased primarily due to lower demand for apparel and home textile products in all regions, as well as specialty textiles products in the Americas and Europe as a result of the worldwide economic slowdown. Average selling prices decreased primarily as a result of a shift in sales mix from Europe to Asia and the Middle East. The decrease in EBITDA was primarily due to lower sales volumes and lower contribution margins as selling prices decreased more than the reduction in raw material and energy costs, offset in part by lower selling, general and administrative costs and lower restructuring costs. During 2009 and 2008, our Textile Effects segment recorded restructuring and plant closing charges of $6 million and $24 million, respectively.

Pigments

        The decrease in revenues in our Pigments segment for 2009 compared to 2008 was due to lower sales volumes and lower average selling prices. Sales volumes decreased primarily due to lower demand in Europe, North America and Asia as a result of the worldwide economic slowdown. Average selling prices decreased primarily as a result of the strength of the U.S. dollar against major European currencies, and due to lower average selling prices in Europe, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East in response to weaker demand, partially offset by higher average selling prices in Asia and North America. The decrease in EBITDA in our Pigments segment was primarily due to higher restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs as the impact of lower sales volumes and average selling prices was offset by lower raw materials and operating costs. During 2009 and 2008, our Pigments segment recorded restructuring, impairment and plant closing charges of $53 million and $4 million, respectively.

Corporate and other—Huntsman Corporation

        Corporate and other includes unallocated corporate expense, unallocated foreign exchange gains and losses, LIFO inventory valuation reserve adjustments, loss on accounts receivable securitization program, loss on the early extinguishment of debt, (expenses) income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation, unallocated restructuring impairment and plant closing costs, extraordinary gain on the acquisition of a business and non-operating income and expense. For 2009, EBITDA from Corporate and other items increased by $66 million to income of $651 million from income of $585 million for 2008. The increase in EBITDA from Corporate and other for 2009 resulted primarily from a $55 million increase in income associated with the Terminated Merger and related litigation ($835 million in 2009 compared to $780 million in 2008). Additionally, the increase in EBITDA was due to a $47 million increase in unallocated foreign exchange gains ($16 million of gains in 2009 versus $31 million of losses in 2008), a $10 million increase in LIFO inventory valuation gains ($14 million of gains in 2009 versus $4 million of gains in 2008), and a $4 million reduction in costs associated with our A/R Program ($23 million of costs in 2009 versus $27 million of costs in 2008). These increases to EBITDA were partially offset by higher restructuring charges of $13 million ($14 million in 2009 versus $1 million in 2008). Additionally, EBITDA decreased due to a $20 million increase in costs associated with the early extinguishment of debt ($21 million loss in 2009 compared to $1 million loss in 2008) and an $8 million decrease in the extraordinary gain on the Textile Effects Acquisition ($6 million gain in 2009 compared to $14 million gain in 2008).

Corporate and other—Huntsman International

        Corporate and other includes unallocated corporate expense, unallocated foreign exchange gains and losses, LIFO inventory valuation reserve adjustments, loss on accounts receivable securitization program, loss on the early extinguishment of debt, unallocated restructuring, impairment and plant closing costs, extraordinary gain on the acquisition of a business and non-operating income and

77


Table of Contents


expense. For 2009, EBITDA loss from Corporate and other items decreased by $23 million to a loss of $178 million from a loss of $201 million for 2008. The decrease in EBITDA loss primarily resulted from a $47 million increase in unallocated foreign exchange gains ($16 million of gains in 2009 versus $31 million of losses in 2008), a $10 million increase in LIFO inventory valuation gains ($14 million of gains in 2009 versus $4 million of gains in 2008), and a $4 million reduction in costs associated with our A/R Program ($23 million of costs in 2009 versus $27 million of costs in 2008). These increases in EBITDA were partially offset by higher restructuring charges of $13 million ($14 million in 2009 versus $1 million in 2008). Additionally, EBITDA decreased due to a $20 million increase in costs associated with the early extinguishment of debt ($21 million loss in 2009 compared to $1 million loss in 2008) and an $8 million decrease in the extraordinary gain on the Textile Effects Acquisition ($6 million gain in 2009 compared to $14 million gain in 2008).

Discontinued Operations

        The operating results of our former Australian styrenics business, and our polymers and base chemicals businesses are classified as discontinued operations, and, accordingly, the revenues of these businesses are excluded from revenues for all periods presented. The results of our Australian styrenics business and our polymers and base chemicals businesses are included in discontinued operations for all periods presented.

        During 2009, we recorded an after tax loss from discontinued operations of $19 million related primarily to the operations of our former Australian styrenics business, legal costs in connection with the fire insurance claim on our former base chemicals business and the revaluation of product exchange liabilities. During 2008, we recorded after tax income from discontinued operations of $84 million related principally to a $175 million gain on partial fire insurance settlement, offset in part by the operations of our former Australian styrenics business and sales and use tax settlements and post-closing adjustments associated with our former base chemicals and polymers businesses.

    Liquidity and Capital Resources

        The following is a discussion of our liquidity and capital resources and generally does not include separate information with respect to Huntsman International in accordance with General Instruction I of Form 10-K.

Cash Flows for Year Ended December 31, 2010 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2009

        Net cash (used in) provided by operating activities for 2010 and 2009 was $(58) million and $1,104 million, respectively. The increase in cash used in operating activities was primarily attributable to the 2009 settlement proceeds received in connection with the Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement and by a $1,014 million unfavorable variance in operating assets and liabilities for 2010 as compared with 2009, offset in part by an increase in operating income as described in "—Results of Operations" above. Upon the adoption of new accounting guidance on January 1, 2010, transfers of accounts receivable under our A/R Programs no longer met the criteria for derecognition and off-balance sheet treatment. Accordingly, the amounts outstanding under our A/R Programs are accounted for as secured borrowings and are now on balance sheet. As a result of the adoption of this new guidance, accounts receivable increased by $254 million and a corresponding increase in cash used in operating activities was reflected in the statement of cash flows for 2010.

        Net cash used in investing activities for 2010 and 2009 was $182 million and $205 million, respectively. During 2010 and 2009, we paid $202 million and $189 million, respectively, for capital expenditures, net of reimbursements. This increase in net capital expenditures was largely attributable to higher 2010 spending on maintenance and environmental projects, offset in part by $34 million of reimbursed capital expenditures in 2010. During 2010, we received proceeds of $110 million from the

78


Table of Contents


settlement of our insurance claims related to the 2006 fire at our former Port Arthur, Texas plant, $34 million of which was reflected in the investing activities section of the statement of cash flows as a reimbursement of capital expenditures. In connection with the consolidation of Arabian Amines Company in the third quarter of 2010, we assumed $14 million of cash. For more information, see "Note 6. Investment in Unconsolidated Affiliates" and "Note 7. Variable Interest Entities" to our consolidated financial statements. During 2009, we paid $31 million for the acquisition of the Baroda Division ("Baroda") of Metrochem Industries Limited ("MCIL"). For more information, see "Note 3. Business Combinations—Baroda Acquisition" to our consolidated financial statements.

        Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities for 2010 was $(543) million as compared with $184 million in 2009. This increase in net cash used in financing activities was primarily due to higher net prepayment of debt in 2010 as compared to 2009 and the resulting call premiums paid in association with these prepayments, partially offset by the issuance of new senior subordinated notes and the on balance sheet treatment of our A/R Programs. In addition, in 2009 we issued $600 million aggregate principal amount of 5.5% senior notes due 2016 (the "2016 Senior Notes") and obtained a $500 million term loan ("Term Loan C") in connection with the Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement. For more information, see "Note 14. Debt" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Cash Flows for Year Ended December 31, 2009 Compared to the Year Ended December 31, 2008

        Net cash provided by operating activities for the years ended December 31, 2009 and 2008 was $1,104 million and $767 million, respectively. The increase in cash provided by operating activities was primarily attributable to settlement proceeds received in connection with the Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement and by a $599 million favorable variance in operating assets and liabilities changes for 2009 as compared with 2008. These increases to cash provided by operating activities were offset in part by a decrease in operating income as described in "—Results of Operations" above.

        Net cash used in investing activities for 2009 and 2008 was $205 million and $489 million, respectively. During 2009 and 2008, we paid $189 million and $418 million, respectively, for capital expenditures. This reduction in capital expenditures was largely attributable to higher 2008 spending on various projects, including $84 million spent on our maleic anhydride expansion at the Geismar, Louisiana site in 2008 as compared to $26 million in 2009; and $32 million spent on our MDI facility at the Geismar, Louisiana site in 2008. In addition, during 2008, we spent $29 million at our Greatham, U.K. titanium dioxide facility. During 2009, we paid $31 million for the Baroda acquisition. During 2009 and 2008, we received $5 million and $3 million, respectively, from the sale of assets. During 2008, we made payments of $29 million related to certain expenditures for the rebuild of our former Port Arthur, Texas facility, resulting in an adjustment to the sales proceeds received in connection with the 2007 U.S. base chemicals disposition. During 2008, we contributed $44 million to our ethyleneamines joint venture in Saudi Arabia.

        Net cash provided by financing activities for 2009 was $184 million as compared with $230 million of net cash provided by financing activities in 2008. During 2009 we issued the 2016 Senior Notes and obtained Term Loan C in connection with the Texas Bank Litigation Settlement Agreement. During this period, we also redeemed in full the $296 million outstanding principal amount 11.625% senior secured notes due 2010 and the $198 million outstanding principal amount 11.5% senior notes due 2012. During 2008, we issued the Convertible Notes in connection with the Apollo Settlement Agreement.

79


Table of Contents

Changes in Financial Condition

        The following information summarizes our working capital (dollars in millions):

 
  December 31,
2010
  December 31,
2009
  Increase
(Decrease)
  Percent
Change
 

Cash and cash equivalents

  $ 966   $ 1,745   $ (779 )   (45 )%

Restricted cash

    7     5     2     40 %

Accounts receivable, net

    1,479     1,019     460     45 %

Inventories

    1,396     1,184     212     18 %

Prepaid expenses

    46     42     4     10 %

Deferred income taxes

    1     36     (35 )   (97 )%

Other current assets

    113     109     4     4 %
                     
 

Total current assets

    4,008     4,140     (132 )   (3 )%
                     

Accounts payable

    887     755     132     17 %

Accrued liabilities

    628     623     5      

Deferred income taxes

    19     2     17     850 %

Current portion of debt

    519     431     88     20 %
                     
 

Total current liabilities

    2,053     1,811     242     13 %
                     
   

Working capital

  $ 1,955   $ 2,329   $ (374 )   (16 )%
                     

        Our working capital decreased by $374 million as a result of the net impact of the following significant changes:

    The decrease in cash and cash equivalents of $779 million resulted from the matters identified in the consolidated statements of cash flows.

    Accounts receivable increased by $460 million due to the inclusion in the December 31, 2010 balance sheet of accounts receivable of $254 million that were previously treated as sold into our A/R programs and as a result of higher sales, partially offset by foreign currency translation impacts as the U.S. dollar strengthened against other relevant currencies. Upon the adoption of new accounting guidance in 2010, transfers of our accounts receivable under the A/R Programs no longer met the criteria for derecognition and off-balance sheet treatment. Accordingly, the amounts outstanding under our A/R Programs are accounted for as secured borrowings beginning January 1, 2010 and are now on balance sheet. For more information regarding the on balance sheet treatment of our A/R Programs, see "Note 16. Off-Balance Sheet Securitization of Accounts Receivable" to our consolidated financial statements.

    Inventories increased by $212 million mainly due to higher raw material costs, partially offset by foreign currency translation as the U.S. dollar strengthened against other relevant currencies.

    The increase in accounts payable of $132 million was primarily due to higher raw material inventory costs, partially offset by foreign currency translation impacts as the U.S. dollar strengthened against other relevant currencies.

    Current portion of debt increased by $88 million. As of December 31, 2010 we had €139 million (approximately $183 million) outstanding on our EU A/R Program with a maturity in October 2011. This amount was classified as current portion of debt as of December 31, 2010. We intend to extend this program in 2011. In addition, on January 18, 2011 we prepaid $100 million of our 7.375% senior subordinated notes due 2015. Accordingly, this amount was classified as current portion of debt as of December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2009, the Convertible Notes were classified as current portion of debt. The Convertible Notes were repaid on January 11, 2010. For more information, see "Note 14. Debt" to our consolidated financial statements.

80


Table of Contents

DIRECT AND SUBSIDIARY DEBT

        Huntsman Corporation's direct debt and guarantee obligations consist of the following: guarantees of certain debt of HPS (our Chinese MDI joint venture); a guarantee of certain obligations of Arabian Amines Company (our consolidated ethyleneamines manufacturing joint venture in Jubail, Saudi Arabia); a guarantee of certain debt of Huntsman Corporation Australia Pty Limited; certain indebtedness incurred from time to time to finance certain insurance premiums; and a guarantee of certain obligations of Huntsman International in its capacity as a contributor and servicer guarantor under the U.S. A/R Program.

        Substantially all of our other debt, including the facilities described below, has been incurred by our subsidiaries (primarily Huntsman International); such subsidiary debt is nonrecourse to us and we have no contractual obligation to fund our subsidiaries' respective operations.

Senior Credit Facilities

        As of December 31, 2010, our Senior Credit Facilities consisted of the following (dollars in millions):

Facility
  Committed
Amount
  Principal
Outstanding
  Carrying
Value
  Interest Rate(2)   Maturity  

Revolving Facility

  $300   $   $ (1) USD LIBOR plus 3.0%       2014 (3)

Term Loan B

  NA   $ 1,302   $ 1,302   USD LIBOR plus 1.50%     2014 (3)

Term Loan C

  NA   $ 427   $ 386   USD LIBOR plus 2.25%     2016 (3)

(1)
We had no borrowings outstanding under our Revolving Facility; we had approximately $29 million (U.S. dollar equivalents) of letters of credit and bank guarantees issued and outstanding under our Revolving Facility.

(2)
The applicable interest rate of the Revolving Facility and Term Loan B are subject to certain secured leverage ratio thresholds. As of December 31, 2010, the weighted average interest rate on our outstanding balances under the Senior Credit Facilities was approximately 2%.

(3)
The Revolving Facility matures in March 2014, but is subject to optional extensions from time to time with the consent of the lenders and subject to certain specified conditions and exceptions. Notwithstanding the stated maturity dates, the maturities of the Revolving Facility, Term Loan B and Term Loan C will accelerate if we do not repay, or refinance, all but $100 million of Huntsman International's outstanding debt securities on or before three months prior to the maturity dates of such debt securities.

        NA—Not applicable

        During 2010, we took the following actions with respect to our Senior Credit Facilities:

    On March 9, Huntsman International entered into a Fifth Amendment to Credit Agreement which replaced the agent bank, extended the stated maturity of the Revolving Facility and amended certain other terms.

    On April 26, we prepaid $124 million on Term Loan B and $40 million on Term Loan C with cash accumulated in prior periods. We incurred a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $5 million.

    On June 22, we prepaid $83 million on Term Loan B and $27 million on Term Loan C with proceeds from the final settlement of insurance claims. We incurred a loss on early extinguishment of debt of $2 million.

81


Table of Contents

    We made the annual scheduled repayment of $16 million on Term Loan B and $5 million on Term Loan C.

        Our obligations under the Senior Credit Facilities are guaranteed by our Guarantor subsidiaries, which consist of substantially all of our domestic subsidiaries and certain of our foreign subsidiaries, and are secured by a first priority lien on substantially all of our domestic property, plant and equipment, the stock of all of our material domestic subsidiaries and certain foreign subsidiaries and pledges of intercompany notes between certain of our subsidiaries.

Accounts Receivable Securitization

        Our A/R Programs are structured so that we grant a participating undivided interest in certain of our trade receivables to bankruptcy remote special purpose entities (the "U.S. SPE" and the "EU SPE"). We retain the servicing rights and a retained interest in the securitized receivables. Information regarding the A/R Programs as of December 31, 2010 is as follows (monetary amounts in millions):

Facility
  Maturity   Maximum Funding
Availability(1)
  Amount
Outstanding
  Interest Rate(2)

U.S. A/R Program

  October 2012   $125   $27.5   USD LIBOR rate plus 3.75%

U.S. A/R Program

 

October 2011

 

$125

 

$27.5

 

CP rate plus 3.50%

EU A/R Program

 

October 2011

 

€225 (approximately $297)

 

€139 (approximately $183)

 

GBP LIBOR rate, USD LIBOR rate or EURIBOR rate plus 3.75%


(1)
The amount of actual availability under the A/R Programs may be lower based on the level of eligible receivables sold, changes in the credit ratings of our customers, customer concentration levels, and certain characteristics of the accounts receivable being transferred, as defined in the applicable agreements.

(2)
Each interest rate is defined in the applicable agreements. In addition, the U.S. SPE and the EU SPE are obligated to pay unused commitment fees to the lenders based on the amount of each lender's commitment.

        As of December 31, 2010, $552 million of accounts receivable were pledged as collateral under the A/R Programs.

Notes

        As of December 31, 2010, we had outstanding the following notes (monetary amounts in millions):

Notes
  Maturity   Interest Rate   Amount Outstanding

Senior Notes

  June 2016     5.500% (1) $600 ($452 carrying value)

Senior Subordinated Notes

  March 2021     8.625 % $530 ($544 carrying value)

Senior Subordinated Notes

  March 2020     8.625 % $350

Senior Subordinated Notes

  January 2015     7.375 % $175

Senior Subordinated Notes

  January 2015     7.500 % €  76 (approximately $100)

Senior Subordinated Notes

  March 2013     6.875 % €  84 (approximately $110)

(1)
The effective interest rate at issuance was 11.73%.

82


Table of Contents

        During 2010, Huntsman International completed the following note offerings:

    On March 17, 2010, a $350 million offering of 8.625% senior subordinated notes due 2020. We used the net proceeds to redeem a portion of our euro-denominated senior subordinated notes due 2013 (€184 million (approximately $253 million)) and a portion of our euro-denominated senior subordinated notes due 2015 (€59 million (approximately $81 million)). See "—Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt" below.

    On September 24, 2010, a $350 million offering of 8.625% senior subordinated notes due 2021. We used the net proceeds to redeem a portion of our euro-denominated senior subordinated notes due 2013 (€132 million (approximately $177 million)) and a portion of U.S. dollar senior subordinated notes due 2014 ($159 million of which settled on October 12, 2010). See "—Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt" below.

    On November 12, 2010, a $180 million follow on offering of 8.625% senior subordinated notes due 2021. The notes are recorded at carrying value of $194 million. We used the net proceeds to redeem all $188 million of our senior subordinated notes due 2014. See "—Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt" below.

        Our notes are governed by indentures which impose certain limitations on Huntsman International, including among other things limitations on the incurrence of debt, distributions, certain restricted payments, asset sales, and affiliate transactions. The notes are unsecured obligations and are guaranteed by certain subsidiaries named as guarantors.

83


Table of Contents

Redemption of Notes and Loss on Early Extinguishment of Debt

        During 2010, we redeemed or repurchased the following notes (monetary amounts in millions):

Date of Redemption
  Notes   Principal Amount of
Notes Redeemed
  Amount Paid
(Excluding Accrued
Interest)
  Loss on Early
Extinguishment
of Debt
 

November 29, 2010

  7.875% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2014   $88   $92   $ 3  

November 26, 2010

 

7.875% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2014

 

$100

 

$104

 
$

4
 

October 12, 2010

 

7.875% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2014

 

$159

 

$165

 
$

7
 

September 27, 2010

 

6.875% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2013

 

€132 (approximately $177)

 

€137 (approximately $183)

 
$

7
 

March 17, 2010

 

6.875% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2013

 

€184 (approximately $253)

 

€189 (approximately $259)

 
$

7
 

March 17, 2010

 

7.50% Senior Subordinated Notes due 2015

 

€59 (approximately $81)

 

€59 (approximately $81)

 
$

2
 

January 11, 2010(1)

 

7.00% Convertible Notes due 2018

 

$250

 

$382

 
$