XML 36 R13.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v2.4.0.6
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
9 Months Ended
Sep. 30, 2012
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES [Abstract]  
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
NOTE 8 – COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

Lease Commitment

The Company leases office facilities under an operating lease agreement that expires May 31, 2017.  As of September 30, 2012, the lease agreement requires future payments as follows:

Year
 
Amount
 
2012
 
 
21,750
 
2013
 
 
89,054
 
2014
 
 
91,432
 
2015
 
 
93,793
 
2016
 
 
96,162
 
2017
 
 
40,479
 
Total
 
$
432,670
 

For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012, the total base rental expense was $21,974 and $65,921, respectively.  The Company does not have any capital leases or other operating lease commitments.

Standby Letter of Credit – CPO 4 Block

On November 5, 2009, JP Morgan Chase issued a Letter of Credit to Banco de Bogota S.A. for $2,037,500. Banco de Bogota then in turn issued a Stand by Letter of Credit to the Agency De National Hydrocarbons to guarantee the Company's compliance and proper execution of the work obligations relating to the phase one (1) work program of the CPO-4 block for the Company's 25% interest in the block. Per the Standby Letter of Credit issued between JP Morgan Chase and Banco de Bogota, the Company was required to keep on deposit with JP Morgan Chase $2,037,500.

On December 2, 2010, JP Morgan Chase amended the Letter of Credit to Banco de Bogota S.A. to increase the total amount of the Letter of Credit to $3,056,250. Banco de Bogota then in turn issued an amended Stand by Letter of Credit to the Agency de National Hydrocarbons to guarantee the Company's compliance and proper execution of the work obligations relating to the phase one (1) work program for the CPO-4 block for the Company's 37.5% interest in the block. Per the amended Standby Letter of Credit issued between JP Morgan Chase and Banco de Bogota, the date of expiration was extended until January 18, 2013 and the Company is required to keep on deposit with JP Morgan Chase $3,056,250. This increase in deposits was related to the Company increasing its interest in the CPO-4 block from 25.0% to 37.5%.

On July 17, 2012, JP Morgan Chase amended the Letter of Credit to Banco de Bogota S.A. to extend the date of expiration to April 1, 2013.  Banco de Bogota then in turn issued an amended Stand by Letter of Credit to the Agency de National Hydrocarbons to extend its existing Stand by Letter of Credit to April 1, 2013.  The deposit with JP Morgan Chase is classified as restricted cash – letter of credit in the accompanying balance sheet. The Company paid $26,674 and $70,687 in fees, respectively, during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2012 related to the Letter of Credit and recorded the fees as other expense.  All other terms and conditions of the Letter of Credit remained unchanged.
 
Legal Contingencies

At September 30, 2012, the Company was the subject of a non-public formal investigation being conducted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC"). Pursuant to the investigation, the Company received subpoenas issued by the SEC. The subpoenas called for the testimony of certain of the Company's officers and the delivery of certain documents. The subpoenas were issued pursuant to a nonpublic formal order of private investigation issued by the SEC on March 1, 2011, which followed a nonpublic informal inquiry commenced by the SEC in October 2010. The Company received a copy of the nonpublic formal order of private investigation on February 10, 2012 in connection with a subpoena issued by the SEC. The SEC is investigating whether there have been any violations of the federal securities laws and appears to have narrowed the focus of their investigation to matters relating to disclosures in the late 2009 and early 2010 time period regarding resource potential on the CPO 4 prospect.  The Company has presented information supporting its disclosure relative to resource potential on the CPO 4 prospect. The investigation does not represent a conclusion by the staff that there have been any violations of the federal securities laws nor whether the staff would conclude that any enforcement action is appropriate. At this time, the Company has not been made aware of a finding by the SEC of any securities violations. Also, as stated in the subpoenas issued by the SEC, the investigation does not mean that the SEC has a negative opinion of any person, entity or security. The Company has cooperated fully, and is committed to continuing to cooperate fully, with the SEC in this matter. It is not possible at this time to predict the timing or outcome of the SEC investigation, including whether or when any proceedings might be initiated, when these matters may be resolved or what, if any, penalties or other remedies may be imposed, and whether any such penalties or remedies would have a material adverse effect on the Company's consolidated financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

In connection with the ongoing non-public formal investigation being conducted by the SEC and indemnification provisions contained in an engagement agreement with Global Hunter Securities, LLC relating to the Company's 2009 equity offering, in July 2012, the Company and Global Hunter entered into an agreement to settle any and all claims by Global Hunter related to reimbursement of attorney's fees under the indemnity provision. During the nine months ended September 30, 2012, the Company paid a total of $490,850 to Global Hunter and in exchange for the payment, the Company was granted a full release by Global Hunter Securities of any future claims or liabilities asserted by Global Hunter in connection with the offering. The payment to Global Hunter Securities was recorded as a charge to additional paid in capital and is listed under the Cash Flow from Financing Activities in the statement of cash flows as Cost of capital.

On April 27, 2012, a purported class action lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against the Company and certain of its executive officers: Steve Silverman v. Houston American Energy Corp. et al., Case No. 4:12-CV-1332.  The complaint generally alleges that, between March 29, 2010 and April 18, 2012, all of the defendants violated Sections 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and SEC Rule 10b-5 and the individual defendants violated Section 20(a) of the Exchange Act in making materially false and misleading statements including certain statements related to the status and viability of the Tamandua #1 well. Two additional class action lawsuits were filed against the Company in May 2012. The complaints seek unspecified damages, interest, attorneys' fees, and other costs. On September 20, 2012, the court consolidated the class action lawsuits and appointed a lead plaintiff. The Company believes all of the claims in the consolidated class action lawsuits are without merit and intends to vigorously defend against these claims. It is not possible at this time to predict the timing or outcome of the class action lawsuits that have or may be filed.

On July 19, 2012, a purported derivative cause of action was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas against certain directors and officers of the Company and the Company, as nominal defendant:  E. Howard King, Jr., derivatively, on behalf of Houston American Energy Corp., v. John F. Terwilliger, John P. Boylan, Orrie Lee Tawes III, Stephen Hartzell, James J. Jacobs, Kenneth A. Jeffers, defendants, and Houston American Energy Corp., as nominal defendant, Case No. 4:12-CV-02182.  The complaint asserts a cause of action by a shareholder on behalf of the Company against certain of the directors and senior executive officers in connection with the June 11, 2012 approval of payment of certain bonuses, increases in salary, grant of certain stock options and entry into certain Change in Control Agreements.  The complaint alleges that the approval of such matters constituted breach of fiduciary duty and corporate waste and seeks injunctive relief to bar each of the actions in question and seeks restitution.  No damages have been or, by the nature of the derivative cause of action, are expected to be alleged against the Company. On October 1, 2012, the Company and the individual defendants filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit, which is currently pending before the court.

The Company is subject to legal proceedings, claims and liabilities that arise in the ordinary course of its business. The Company accrues for losses associated with legal claims when such losses are probable and can be reasonably estimated. These accruals are adjusted as further information develops or circumstances change. Except as noted above, the Company is currently not a party to any known material litigation.
 
Tax Contingency

At September 30, 2012, the Company had engaged its tax advisors in Colombia to evaluate certain tax and other filings made in Colombia by other advisors for 2010 and 2011.  The Company's advisors identified inconsistencies between tax and non-tax filings with respect to equity investments made by the Company in Colombia during 2010.  Based on guidance from the Company's advisors, no liability or expense has been accrued with respect to the tax on equity investments.  In the event that it is determined that a Colombian equity tax is due, the full amount of the Colombian tax is estimated at approximately $1.2 million.